Response To https://twitter.com/PhoenixThis/status/737007479364718592

Firstly, my discussion experience seems to suggest that the term "supernatural" might essentially refer to "that whose suggested existence seems to contradict the humanly-perceived patterns of existence". To me, the extent to which human recognition of reality's patterns is accepted as not being exhaustive seems to leave logical potential for such actual existence. Apparently, as a result, the concept "supernatural" seems to have little place in logical analysis of existence and non-existence, including with regard to the existence of God. Apparently, God either does or does not exist.

That said, the SIDP link seems to propose substantiation of God's existence via three of science's findings and their apparently most logical implications. Might you be interested in presenting the reasoning flaw(s) you might perceive in the proposed substantiation?