What's supernatural got to do with it?
If I find a watch on the beach, I don't assume it was created by a supernatural being. Neither do I assume it evolved.
If the sudden appearance in the Cambrian is better explained by a designer, that says nothing about who or what the designer is. "Supernatural" is a red herring thrown out by evolutionists so they don't have to answer which fits the fossil record better.
If God happens to be one option that fits the bill for the designer, so be it.
Besides, only God is natural. Everything else is a creation.
>>What’s supernatural got to do with it?<<
Your post:
>>The current definition excludes all alternatives other than naturalism.<<
That which is not natural is supernatural.
>>If I find a watch on the beach, I don’t assume it was created by a supernatural being. Neither do I assume it evolved.<<
Non sequitur.
You didn’t answer the question. How can something not based on “naturalism” be used, measured, defined and applied?