Yes. 'anything other than natural' = supernatural. Scientific theories do not deal with anything supernatural. It is unscientific to theorize anything arose from supernatural causes. Man is not supernatural. The computer I am sitting in front of is man-made. You get the idea I found http://www.designinference.com/documents/2005.06.Defense_of_ID.pdf very interesting, pages 8-11 deal with your objection very well. They argument boils down to an explanation of how science is currently locked in place to only use methodological materialism. The graphic of the chess board is telling.
Trying to redefine science to make ID theory scientific isn't going to work. The same 99+% of scientists who think ID theory is not science will not agree to redefine science. Dembski tries hard but he's having a lot of trouble persuading other scientists.
They argument boils down to an explanation of how science is currently locked in place to only use methodological materialism. Yeah, darn that methodological materialism!! What's it ever done for us? (Other than modern chemistry, physics, electronics, biochemistry, mathematics, geology, spaceflight, aeronautics...)
We really need to expand science to include bibles, horoscopes and Ouija boards!