I don't believe in God, I believe in Gravity

What I believe is totally irrelevant in this case and yes, of course I would ask how I would know.

I would document what happened, what we could observe and put it in the unknown/unexplained folder.No evidence of the supernatural there.

I don't see where there was any test of the supernatural there.Your basic premise is flawed when you say "The hypothesis is that those who are more devout will receive healing powers from GOD. The prediction is that those who devote themselves to GOD will exhibit these healing powers."That is not a test of the supernatural. At best your results, if the did happen show that a group of people have healing powers. It says a little about that group but nothing about the supernatural.Again, I would not see any support for the supernatural there.

I have never seen a predictive test of the supernatural proposed.As I said, I don't see anything in your example related to the supernatural.

I see the hypothesis as flawed from the beginning. I see no test of the supernatural in your example.

Sorry but I get tired of repeating the obvious. Go read what I write.

No, once again you simply misrepresent what I have said.I said I see no test of the supernatural in your example.

Not so.Did you say "The above would be objective empirical evidence in favour of the supernatural claim in question obtained by the application of the hypothetico-deductive method."?

What you believe is of course irrelevant and unrelated to fact or truth and you continue to mistake what I at least would say.I would not see what you described as evidence of the supernatural and a most might use the term miraculous in the colloquial sense similar to "The pesto I fixed for dinner last night was miraculous." I agree making sh9it up is ludicrously easy but I disagree with almost all of the rest of that sentence and fully with the last sentence.

Perhaps not everything but that is the best step. Put it in the unknown/unexplained folder and work on it. Tagging it as supernatural does nothing.

Maybe you just have a very low standard for evidence because from your example I see no evidence for the supernatural.

Too funny. So would I but at least I would know enough to not claim it was impossible since it had happened.That is why I would place it in the unknown/unexplained folder instead of continuing to think it was impossible.But labeling it as supernatural seems pretty silly until there was actual evidence of the supernatural.

Are you saying that even when we know something did happen it is impossible that it happened?If you want to claim that something that did happen is impossible to happen I gotta wonder about you in many ways.

Yes.AbE:I don't know why you keep asking questions I've answered time after time.The question is whether or not there is anyway that the supernatural could be evidenced not what could be accepted unevidenced. It is not a matter of belief but rather science.Someone may believe that your example is a miracle but that is NOT scientific. Edited by jar, : see AbE:

The issue is about evidence of the supernatural.If we are not talking about scientific evidence then why the fuck are you posting such crap?If you just believe it is impossible for such things to happen then that's fine, but if it happens then folk have claimed that it should be possible to scientifically examine the evidence.If science has left the building, then why are you even wasting my time?