deny that phenomenon exist beyond the ability of science to explain,
Duh...there are always phenomenon currently beyond the ability of science to explain. That's what scientists do for a living. They try to find explanations.
admit science needs to grow.
Duh...science is always trying to expand scientific knowledge (=growing) by exploring the unknown and seeking explanations.
Also, I don't think game analogies are valid, I don't expect to convince you of my view (and all that implies), and I need sleep.
The question is whether these phenomenon are beyond the current methods of science.
...science is always trying to expand scientific knowledge (=growing) by exploring the unknown and seeking explanations.
The growth I mentioned isn't the growth of knowledge, but of methodology.
Even though backed into a corner, you seem unwilling to to make the tiny conceptual leap that is right at the edge of your argument. We're no longer dealing with the analogy of the chess board, but the definitions of the terms we are using and their logical implications. There is nowhere left to turn but to admit that science must eventually change its methodology if it is ever to explain phenomenon it is currently, by definition, incapable of explaining.
Good night...