No. I have agreed that science studies the natural universe. I have disagreed with you that science must assume that everything in the physical universe can be explained through Naturalistic means. That is an assumption, and that is a philosophical axiom, not a scientifically derived conclusion. I have said quite clearly that you can study only the natural parts of the physical universe whilst not assuming that every single part of it must have a naturalistic explanation. This isn't rocket science.
Are you honestly suggesting that these scientists are claiming that such events are supernatural?
Can you read? How many different ways do I have to say this? I quite clearly didn't say that. Go back and read.
So how, exactly, would a scientist go about applying the scientific method to the supernatural. Be specific.
Once again, you're simply not reading what I've written. You seem to come at the world so full of your presuppositions that even when reading something in front of you, you can't just analyze the facts in black and white but have to force them through the prism of your presuppositional filter. Just like you do with your "science". Your behaviour in this thread is a very good data point to the argument I have made.
If you can get someone to help you understand the sentences I have written, go ahead and ask them.