Miracles are not a scientific explanation, but the are evidence for the reality outside of the physical, “natural” world; that physical world which the scientific method can be used to study, test for, and evaluate. They are evidence of the supernatural intruding into the natural and violating the recognized laws that govern our universe.
Just because evidence is not *scientific* does not mean that it is not real, it is not true, it is not valid, that it cannot be used to support one’s viewpoint. All it means is that it is not *scientific*.
The big problem is that it’s all rejected as not real, true, valid because it doesn’t meet the criteria of being called science, as if science were the ultimate arbiter of all knowledge and reality.
But so what if it’s not scientific? It’s not wrong by default because of that and that’s exactly what we’re being told when we hear the *But it doesn’t agree with science* line. Maybe science is wrong.
What would have been a miracle 100 years ago is now a normal everyday occurrence.
Of a truth, if a phenomenon could be consistently observed or studied under laboratory conditions it would not be called a miracle in the first place.