[Dimensio]

In fact, there must be a place for the supernatural in scientific inquiry because the supernatural exists.

It does? Support this assertion.

If scientists are forced not to recognize something that exists they are limited in their inquiry.

Scientists are limited in their inquiry. Science is the study of nothing more than how things in the natural universe works. Even if the supernatural exists, science cannot address it, because it would fall outside of the scope of scientific inquiry and observation. There's no need to redefine science; just come up with a new field of study that addresses the supernatural.

[Junior]

Remember however, if you can observe it and test it, it ain't supernatural by definition.

[ArGee]

It does? Support this assertion.

No. I don't intend to. I know it to be true. I don't care if you are convinced or not. The big issue is that if you insist Science must deny the supernatural you must support the assertion that it does not exist. Proving a negative is impossible, so you are left in an untenable situation. The most you can say or do is assert that you don't intend to include the supernatural in your own worldview. That is your right. Insisting that there can be no place for the supernatural in scientific inquiry is not your right.

Shalom.