Sure you did. First you said there will be times matter behaves in a way that is inconsistent with our understanding of the laws of nature, and then you said it is scientific to exclude the possibility of miracles. I am asking you what is the difference between a miracle and an occasion when matter behaves in a way that is inconsistent with our understanding of the laws of nature.
You throw the word "liar" around too quickly. Why not answer the question instead.
Are you so dense that you make the same mistake twice??? I said our "CURRENT" understanding of the laws of nature. Current. As in our understanding now with the understanding that that our understanding of what the laws of nature are may change. It doesn't happen the way we predict, but, with the fullness of time, in one of the ways in which it could happen. A miracle posits things happening in a manner it cannot happen.
I am asking you what is the difference between a miracle and an occasion when matter behaves in a way that is inconsistent with our understanding of the laws of nature.
A miracle is a made up story to explain stuff people don't understand or to make their made-up religious stories more interesting (like talking snakes and magic fruit) or their superheroes seem powerful (like turning water to wine or walking on water.) We understand how this matter acts in these situation, and what it would take for those things to occur, as well as the psychology of the religious and safely dismiss the stories, as told, as made up.
You throw the word "liar" around too quickly. Why not answer the question instead.
If creationists didn't lie all the time, I wouldn't have to throw the word around.