This is the fatal flaw of your argument. It is your baseless assumption that scientists think things only have a natural explanation. They KNOW that Science only can test, measure, accept or reject things that are the result of natural and predictable forces. Most Scientists in the US are, like myself, people of faith. It is a straw-man argument that Scientists are somehow blinded to the possibility of the miraculous and divine, we are NOT, most of us are believers. We simply know that what ‘is’ can be measured and what ‘IS’ cannot.
Heb11:1 Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen.
Heb11:6 And without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he who comes to God must believe that He is and that He is a rewarder of those who seek Him.
Actually, not. Read what you wrote carefully.
The material world can be the result of supernatural forces, or maybe extra-natural would be a better word; but that doesn't mean that it still cannot be tested or measured by the same scientific method used when the assumption is made that the world is the result of *natural* forces.
The scientific method is useful for collecting and organizing data collected. It's useful in that it gives scientists a universal guideline to follow so that another's work is reproducible and there's some sense to it.
It does not give scientists any reason to make philosophical assumptions about the world in which we live. Those assumptions are subjective and the result of philosophy. The assumption that everything has only a natural explanation is just that. Since science only deals with the *natural* and not what it labels the *supernatural*, then making philosophical determinations is way outside the scope of what science is capable of, therefore there's no basis for those determinations.