Personnally, I define supernatural as something that is ''outside of nature, and/or not subject to the laws of nature''. This definition does not exclude that the paranormal can interact inside nature, but they nonetheless would not seemed constrained by it.
You
do realize that
every single time in history that people have pointed to a phenomenon that appeared mysterious and claimed that natural laws didn;t apply...that it actually turned out that
their understanding of the real natural laws was simply wrong?
What you're doing, slevesque, is pointing at a phenomenon and saying "my understanding of nature is
so accurate that I can firmly say that
this particular phenomenon is an exception to nature's laws." You;re saying that the problem of your confusion lies
not with your own ignorance, but with
reality.
Others in history have made the same mistake. Lord Kelvin once famously said that such things as muscle movement and other biological topics were "infinitely beyond" human understanding...and yet we understand them pretty well now.
When you identify a mysterious phenomenon as "supernatural," you're committing a supreme act of hubris, stating that
your knowledge is so perfect that
reality is responsible for your confusion as opposed to your own ignorance.
™ Version 4.2
(1)