No.
And nobody said that trying to understand miracles is bad. That's misrepresenting what I said.
Understanding true miracles would be an exercise in futility.
Nor would discovering what people thought were miracles 200 years ago, negate real miracles. Just because some incomprehensible things later became understood doesn't mean that everything will and that everything has a *natural* cause, or explanation.
And you evos wonder why you're accused of trying to use science to destroy religion. Because every time something of a religious nature comes up, you try to explain it away using science, the very thing that you deny doing.
What is a true miracle and how does one tell it apart from a non true miracle?
“Because every time something of a religious nature comes up, you try to explain it away using science, the very thing that you deny doing.”
That isn’t a factually correct representation of reality.