I´ve problems with the term "super natural". If you mean phenomena, which can´t not be explained today, my answer is a clear YES. We will find explanations later by the progress of science.  If you think about some hidden mythic forces my answer is a definite NO.

Yes

I´ve problems with the term "super natural". If you mean phenomena, which can´t not be explained today, my answer is a clear YES. We will find explanations later by the progress of science.  If you think about some hidden mythic forces my answer is a definite NO.

Dear @Umer, I think that there is a need for farther research in the topic because there does not exist a  solid scientific proof of existence. 

Many natural phenomena disappear before they can be discovered by science. This implies that at least some phenomena whatever their nature (natural or super-natural) will remain hidden to human-based science practice. In many cases, phenomena whatever their nature are accessible to a small number of people, and therefore remain hidden for the vast majority of people/scientists. It's a question of scale of analysis.  

Super natural is a popular science belief. in this sense supernatural refers to those part of the phenomena or events that which are not included in human knowledge or physical laws. in other words it is not "Natural" or "Physical". So the miracles can be fitted in this category. Technologies and sciences are advances in the "dimension" of human knowledge of existing nature's law, therefore more advancing technologies just demonstrate more exploration of the hidden parts of governing  laws of nature.

However, understanding of world's mechanisms depend on our brain function and senses (e.g. visual sense). that themselves are parts of nature!  This imposes limiting

borders on dimensional extent of sciences. So we may label "supernatural" to those part of physical world laws  that "never" could be understood by human thought.

In this view the answer is "No".

I concur with Hanno.

There are "naturals" today that are I believe natural but which existence, indicators, and proofs, our present science has not yet identified, detected or diagnosed. If this is the supernatural your refer to, Umer, my answer is yes.

If the "supernatural" you refer to refers to magic, "spontaneous generation" or "wiil-o-the-wisp" then my answer is no.

Dear Umer,

I have the same troble like Hanno and Marcel do. What is super natural according to you?

In many cases, what has been perceived as 'magic'/super natural in the past is described as natural today (e.g. darkness during the day because of the relative positions of moon, sun and Earth). 'Magic' therefore is defined via the level of understanding using perception constraints as a guide.

Is hypnosis and its effects on humans 'natural' or 'magic'? 

Dear @Umer, what is Super Natural Dimensions !? As my friends stated before, @Hanno, @Marcel, @Andras..., I need some more facts about in order to make an appropriate answer!

I do not see why dmensions higher than 3 are to be onsidered as "supernatural". If so, then mathematics is already a supernatural understanding of R4, R8, R11, etc.

We already have supernatural men and knowledge among us, it appears.

The question could be re-stated probably as follows: will higher dimensions than 3 (D-3) be sometime soon a cultural, i.e. daily experience for most human beings? For instance...

Did Carlos did you include the dimension of what people call 'time'? 

I ought to, indeed, dear Marcel. By all means!

The standard linear or cuclic understanding of time should also be "supenaturally" added, i.e. considered.

We need a clear definition of super natural at the first place!

@Riaz,

Yes, that´s also my opinion. Otherwise we are talking around.

No, never, semantics will always get in the way. And Super-Natural doesn't need scientific understanding or belief, although it would help getting more people on board to understand the power of their minds and attitudes. 

Dear marcel find it out in a concise dictionary e.g.

Dictionary.com

Dear question owner,

We are waiting intensely for your explanation if not, participants prepare a working definition as we like it.

Dictionary.com

'Unexplainable by natural law or phenomena; abnormal'.

Following this definition of 'super natural' I propose that the definition is human-nature dependent, that is dependent on the perception constraints of humans/scientist. Something that is 'natural' but inaccessible to human science because of biology-based human perception constraints is defined as 'super natural'

This also implies that depending on the perception abilities of the living beings/ persons involved a phenomenon can be described as 'natural' or 'super natural'

Well, without sarcasm we can guess that Umer has a nice sense of humor. The focus in this post has been on the "supernatural". For, the answer has been unanimous.

Beyond humor and fun, we can all profit to, indeed as some here say, try to clarify the questionable issue.

Science, after all, is about naturalizing anything that has been previously considered as supernatural. From storms and lightnings, to ether and homunculi, f.i.

Thus everything is natural and is waiting to be discovered. Yes?

As Heraclitus said (frag. 123): "Nature loves to hide" (physys khryptesthai philei). This basically means: nature is latent no patent.

It is science and the human's mind and spirit to unveil it - well, and explain it.

I do not think anyone would ever say that nature is patent.

Supernatural phenomena are those phenomena presently not explained by science or not yet scrutinized scientifically. Thus, today's supernatural phenomenon would become tomorrow's natural phenomenon. However, Nature includes so much wonders that human being might continue to find a new supernatural phenomenon.

That is and has been, indeed, the history of the scientific endeavor, dear Tatsuo. This is exactly what I mean by a naturalization of epistemology and research.

Dear Carlos, yes, we have written the same thing in somewhat different words.

Yes indeed dear @Kamal, the countries with strong research programs are the leading countries; i.e. research  successful.

Dear Abedallah,

An honest question: What is the relationship between investments in research and the level of environmental degradation across countries?  Do countries that invest more in research express higher environmental degradation, or not? Perhaps there is no relationship at all. 

Do super natural forces to be discovered handle problems related to environmental degradation? 

And therefore people increase exploitation of petrol expected to be increased in 2015 (FMI), despite messages/publications from scientists not to do this....

Dear Marcel,

that "petrol" behaviour is not super natural, it is just egocentric and rapacious.

Dear @Marcel, I totally agree with you; the correlation between investment in research and the level of environmental degradation across countries might approach zero; there is no relation at all.

However, the contrary might has led to a catastrophe. The industrial countries are polluting the air much faster than doing research; this means that they have to do more and more heavy research and stop the resources that harm the nature.

Dear All thank you so much for your value able contribution as well as curiosity... 

Dear

Hanno Krieger

András Bozsik

Ljubomir Jacić

Eddie Seva See

José Antonio Acevedo-Díaz

Riaz Uddin

András Bozsik

Sorry i could not reply earlier because i was travelling .... i would like to explain the definition of supernatural as per the literature review and views  extracted from latest research on Natural and Super Natural

first see what is Natural

Nature, in the broadest sense, is equivalent to the natural world, physical world, or material world. "Nature" refers to the phenomena of the physical world, and also to life in general. It ranges in scale from the subatomic to the cosmic. If anything is natural than it must function or occur in a normal way; lacks abnormalities or deficiencies. Concepts that are natural need to be with causal explanation (external cause).So, natural things are worthy and capable of explanations. Our five senses can be enough to understand and feel natural phenomena

Now coming over to The supernatural

or supra natural "nature"  Super natural encompass all the happenings , all  phenomena , experiences,  ideologies and  concepts that support something paranormal ,beyond or above nature; that which is not from the observable, tangible or measurable universe, especially regarding divine things /beings /actions /realms. So anything above or beyond what one holds to be natural. In the case of one who has strong scientific and atheistic beliefs, the supernatural is anything un explainable by natural law. While one who hold mystical theistic beliefs may have no conception of supernatural phenomena, they might perceive the scientist's natural laws, on their own, as being sub natural.

One complicating factor is that there is no universal agreement about what the definition of “natural” is, and what the limits of naturalism might be. The term "supernatural" is often used interchangeably with paranormal or preternatural— the latter typically limited to an adjective for describe in abilities which appear to exceed the bounds of possibility. Likewise, legendary characters such as vampires and leprechauns are not considered supernatural.

Many supporters believe that past, present, and future complexities and mysteries of the universe cannot be explained solely by naturalistic means and argue that it is reasonable to assume that a non-natural entity or entities resolve the unexplained.

By its own definition,science is incapable of examining or testing for the existence of things that have no physical effects, because its methods rely on the observation of physical effects. Proponents of super naturalism claim that their belief system is more flexible, which allows more diversity in terms of intuition and epistemology. Some opponents argue that many supernatural claims involve physical phenomena which can be tested, but believe that scientific tests to date have failed to uphold the validity of those claims.Views on the "supernatural" include that it is:

Indistinct from nature

From this perspective, some events occur according to physical laws, and others occur according to a separate set of principles external to known

attributed to nature

Others believe that all events have natural and only natural causes. They believe that human beings ascribe supernatural attributes to purely natural events, such as lightning,rainbows,floods, and the origin of life. Opponents of the idea of the supernatural point out that our knowledge of the world is continuously increasing. Some occurrences, once assumed supernatural, can today be explained by scientific theories. Studies suggest supernatural phenomena are not detectable in scientifically controlled conditions.There have been, for example, various studies on astrology, most of them with negative results.

Part of a larger nature

This is a view largely held by monists and process theorists. According to this view, the "supernatural" is just a term for parts of nature that modern science and philosophy do not yet properly understand, similar to how sound and lightning used to be mysterious forces to science. Materialist monists believe that the"supernatural" consists of things in the physical universe not yet understood by modern science, while idealist monists reject the concept of "supernatural" on the grounds that they believe "nature" is the non-material. Neutral monists maintain that "nature" and "super nature" are artificial at egories as they believe that the material and non-material are both either equally real and imultaneously existent, or illusions that stem from the human mind's interpretation of reality

 Related words are mystical and metaphysical. On the one hand, many think 'supernatural' simply means there's no known explanation for it -- yet. They use 'supernatural' the way some people speak of , prone to superstition, syncretism, UFOs and lifestyle fictions (like in TV shows or movies), or need to have a handy place to fix the blame. Send in the supernatural, so they don't have to admit they don't know, as a stopgap measure until somebody finds a reasonably-reasonable 'answer'. Others use 'supernatural' to describe just about anything that happens a little strangely something different from physical laws of nature, some thing miracle, some thing magical...i come again .More than ever before, 'spiritual' has become the word of choice for vague, foggy, and shrouded things with no rules, no substance, and really no definition. Anything that bears any amount of mystery is said to be 'spiritual'. Some people even place the paranormal in their minds where the spiritual needs to be. To them, ghosts and magic and ESP and vampires are somehow part of 'spirituality'.    

A similar term as supernatural is 'metaphysical' originally comes from the ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle, for whom the metaphysical meant some form of theological philosophy. It means something else in today's world. The modern media often use 'metaphysical' to mean the same thing as 'spiritual' or even 'supernatural'. There's lots of overlap, but the words refer to different things. Metaphysics is the study of such matters. Metaphysics is rooted in intangibles, that which can't be found by the physical senses, that which holds everything together like wood beams in a roof. In some ways, it is more like philosophy than religion. But 'metaphysical' hasn't (yet) suffered the same very selfish turn 'spiritual' has.Metaphysics deals with questions like, "what is real?", "what is important?" and "what is actually happening?" behind what we can sense.

This was all from my literature review on this subject

Oky now my personal opinion is: there is a force , a divine force, a Supreme power exists every where that controls all natural and supernatural phenomena ....who created the universe and all the creations in world and beyond ...and that Supreme Creator  is God Almighty ....He who knows the mysteries of today and tomorrow ,and knows better whether some mysteries could ever be solved by science or not.... 

Dear Carlos Eduardo Maldonado....

 your above statement / sentence, i go through number of times and i still cannot figure out what you are pointing at ? whether you wana say that "i got sense of humor or this question is a humorous?" and makes me further anxious to ask you a question what is a serious question or a humor-able question? i pose this question in front of you for my guidance please ....i was eager to know opinion of yourself and this question is totally very serious as  i believe when philosophers and theologians get to do enough thinking or talking, and in some occasions they eventually run themselves in a circle. This doesn't usually mean that's the way it really is, it just means that either  they've tripped over a paradox; or words and thoughts have just simply run their course on the matter. They've bumped their brains on the ceiling of a mystery, but don't want to admit it, so they keep trying.  When two different things are described as being the same, or when reason runs itself into a circle, they repeatedly fall into tautologies. Either they've 'proven' the equality of unequal things, or they're doing the philosophical equivalent of dividing by zero.  

SO researchers ,many thanks for your opinions and  valuable discussions but the discussion is debatable  because still a lot to be discussed .....

You can begin to get some idea by looking at the research done in Russia and then the United States on ESP during World War Two. Methodology has improved since then, but the actual utility is yet to be shown. I cannot say we will find statistically significant data showing we can cross the boundary of natural phenomena, but I can't say we won't. I have always tried to keep the door open for any possibility. 

Dear Umer,

you nicely summarized what others wrote and added additional information: 

For discussion:

How many people claim they had near death experiences (meeting people that past away, perception of unknown environments, perceiving visually from a distance your own body, passing from one room to another having super sense experiences, etc...)? When I have lucid dream experiences (as clear as the best television screen pictures), I visit many places I don't know during daily life, I meet many faces/people I don't know during daily life , etc... I travel mentally at many different/fantastic places, without using a car/airplane/bus/train...  

I have the impression there are different worlds at different levels of perception.  How can all this be placed in an Darwinian evolutionary/natural framework??? How can science get access to these unique experiences? To me, all this is 'natural' even if not really accessible to scientific approaches.

Mankind as a microcosm of the macrocosm. In order to begin to understand this, one must overcome materialism and its arrogance. Is consciousness a function of the brain or of the soul? If of the brain, how is it that some with minimal brain have had IQs of 126? When does a developing child's consciousness awaken? We seek to prove what is above the physical with physical instruments but this cannot be done. With such instruments, at most we can do like CERN and "measure" the effects on what we can thereby observe. When one laughs, cries, moved to sacrifice their life for others, or moved by a concert, we can measure brain activity in certain regions. Cool. Is it arrogance that leads to the conclusion that this proves such emotions occur, nay, originate in these folds of the brain?  We are not amazed that the moon has such effect on tides. What effect does it have on Mankind? Ask the hospitals.

Speaking of Darwin. We have the fossil records. Darwin gave us a plausible interpretation but it supposes that the living can emerge from the lifeless.  Huh? So can there be another interpretation? Sure! But one would need to start Mankind in the Super-Natural, er spiritual realm as an archetype and then follow this evolution in the spiritual realm (yeah, I know, how can one do this as a science?). Out of this stream falls away the plants and later the animals until finally Mankind is ready for Earth and Earth is ready for Mankind. The fossil record looks the same.

NDE (near death experience) has already been mentioned and it has been studied with many subjects who report seeing their whole life displayed in front of them as a panorama. They are observing where time has replaced a spatial dimension. The ancients knew this as the Akashic Record. The Bible calls it The Book of Life. For one properly trained, it can be studied offering us a kind of Spiritual Science.

This is the age of science .The research scholars are working & moving to find out the new elements in universal space..The tasks deserve compliments from the natural to super natural dimension one can not make merely the process of laboratory with the working of 5 elements with remain within us & also within the purve of natural environments .For this purpose the research scholars have to concentrate & deep into our conscious forces & the energy forces working within us  throu power of prayer,Meditation ,& certain energy forces of our sub conscious & unconscious mind .

In the above the said research elements may create the atmosphere of light under our AURAS '' inspiring for necessary guideline for which the mind is working .

To enter super natural dimension one may receive the divine guideline & the super natural atmosphere never experience by scientist as this can not be a mode of the laboratory tuning however with new light & experience enjoy by scientist he can make new devices with the help of the knowledge ,& Experience gain by him 

I am coming to this discussion rather late, but I am interested in the topic.  As someone who engages in "ghost hunting", I have on occasion run across phenomena that seem to defy any known natural cause.  However, with continued observation I have found in some cases patterns that seem to fit with known phenomena.  This could mean that I am missing some currently known natural cause for these phenomena, or it could mean that there is something currently unknown that is following the known laws.  From my personal experiences I lean towards the something currently unknown explanation. 

However, my personal experiences also suggest that the currently unknown is findable, and perfectly natural, in the sense that it does follow known or knowable universal laws.  This includes NDE accounts which to my mind suggest an awareness of some accessible dimension/plane/region where static magnetic fields are either non-existent or else greatly reduced from what we are use to. 

How this could be is baffling I admit, but I am attempting to find evidence that human consciousness can influence EM fields to a greater extent than is currently suggested.  I was hoping to do this tomorrow, but a key member of the team I was assembling has run into an unavoidable scheduling conflict.  We are currently hoping for a late October trial.  What evidence I have seen so far suggests that it is possible, but I know of no way to duplicate the evidence.  What I am wanting to do should be replicable, and hopefully successful.

Science has already, and is continuously, crossing the boundary between the natural and the supernatural. Science has explained many things, thought in the past to be supernatural, as simple natural phenomena. Think about the phenomenon of thunder and lightning. In the past it was regarded a supernatural event, caused, among others, by gods. And which gods those were depended on one's culture. At present, thunder and lightning are perfectly explainable by science, nonetheless, people fear it. In the mean time, many items have moved from the shelves of the supernatural to the shelves of the natural. The only thing one can say is that such items were then not supernatural after all.

According to an interview with Harvey Whitehouse (2014, interview 'To Understand Religion, Think Football: Sacred beliefs likely arose out of prehistoric bonding and rituals'. Nautilus, 4th Sept 2014. http://nautil.us/issue/17/big-bangs/to-understand-religion-think-football ), Whitehouse is convinced that science never will be able to prove or disprove that there is a god or the supernatural, since that is exclusively the realm of faith. Whitehouse would also like religious people to realise that many mysteries of the past are explainable at present. And scientists should realise that much of human life goes beyond the scope of scientific explanation, because the human brain cannot possibly cope with the complexity or harshness of reality. J. Kekes (2008. Enjoyment. Oxford: Clarendon Press) confirms this view, writing that the lamentable truth about the human condition is that most lives have been more or less miserably and a very few good indeed. All the time people have to endure unfairness, cruelty, injustice, hostility, humiliation, illnesses, misfortune and loss of lives. People tend to ignore this truth, and Kekes  quotes T.S. Eliot: ‘[H]uman kind | Cannot bear very much reality'. This causes many people to believe in something supernatural, just for the drake of a hope of a better future or to cope with too much bad reality.

Whitehouse (2014) further thinks that all people, even scientists, at a certain level have some form of religion. People may dismiss their religious feelings but cannot erase them in total. Whitehouse does not agree that the main reason for religion is a quest for meaning but rather emphasises the importance of participation in a certain religion and the related benefits it has for the participants and their community. He maintains that in pre-scientific times, explanation about many unexplainable matters was transferred to the next generation by means of spirits, goddesses, gods and God. Unexplainable things, such as death and accident could be explained through divinities and a higher goal behind it. Science may be able to explain why and how people for instance had a fatality, but it cannot help people with the mourning process and closure of grief. Belief in divinities bonded people through complicated rituals and helped in their survival.

In summary, if you are a believer, then the supernatural exists. If you are not a believer, then it does not exist. It is a futile exercise to believe that one can prove or disprove the supernatural or any other meta-physical occurrence. 

One problem in this area is deciding just what is "supernatural" and what is natural.  Does quantum physics lie within the "natural" realm or in the "supernatural" realm.  If it lies within the "natural" realm, how do we explain the "spooky action at a distance" which is well documented to occur in the quantum realm?  If however we place quantum physics in the "supernatural" realm, how do we explain that it works well enough for us to use it for what we now accept as mundane, everyday objects such as televisions and computers?

A major mistake many make is to assume that our consciousness has remained constant. As applied to sensory stimulation, can we say it has remained constant? Has our perception of color for example remained constant? As our percepts and concepts have evolved, so has our consciousness. Is it not possible that people long ago experienced the world differently? And as consciousness has evolved, could not our relationship to the gods and spiritual beings (if they exist) also evolve? Did Homer merely add the Muse for artistic or political purpose or did the ancient Greeks actually perceive something that we no longer can because of evolution? Was there a Twilight of the Gods? Did they not withdraw? Did the ancient Mystery Centers close when they realized that their god had ceased its activity? Perhaps the divine plan is to develop Freedom within the Human Being. Maybe we do have a soul that is going through an evolution, a destiny that requires the soul to develop capacities of acting morally on its own, to be kicked out of the nest to grow up. Maybe our soul is like Sleeping Beauty who has fallen into deep sleep (from the perspective of a spiritual world) by pricking her finger on technology (the spinning wheel)? Let's be careful we do not look arrogantly upon the past. Let us not believe that the ancients merely threw in gods for what they did not understand. Such is not science but childish ignorance.

I have discovered this well developed and already forgotten question only today and want to contribute some of my views.

It was correctly mentioned by Andras: What is super-natural?

If I would be classifier, I would put there such questions which have the following properties: a) they are interesting and important for understanding, b) there is no theory so far in any science to explain them, and we are not yet close, c) there are some hints that such phenomena may exist.

Several examples:

1) Telepathy (communication of thoughts or ideas by means other than the known senses)

2) Influence of cosmic objects on the behavior of humans (astrology, etc)

3) UFO (as visitors from other galaxies, but not as secret weapon of Earth origin)

Note that I put here not purely natural but also social phenomena that cannot exist without our brains. Note that there might be high complexity in separation of conscious and subconscious (just see the works of Freud).

I would not put here dark matter. It may happen that one day physics will discover it.

And finally: I believe that we can move closer to understanding of super-natural in future. But it might happen not only with using science that has too high restrictions in its methodology of understanding.

I would note that as soon as we can explain the "supernatural", it becomes natural. 

Now as for the three examples cited by Yuri, telepathy is probably linked to mind as independent of brain, which is rejected by materialism.  However, I can probably find 20-30 thousand pages of well documented phenomena to support this notion without much effort.  Looking at references noted in what I already know about would probably add far more on to that total.  In fact one source I have claims that there are hundreds of thousands of pages of quality material in support of this topic.

The influence of cosmic objects on humans seems to me to be quite plausible, but not to the level of astrology.  I view that as more likely merely influence that could, in theory, be detected, i.e. gravitational or electromagnetic influences, and the farther removed the celestial object, the weaker the influence.

As for UFO's, I have seen various somewhat plausible explanations.  One suggested a "cloaked" robotic drone in circumpolar orbit at about 50,000 miles sending holograms and monitoring human response and then sending any collected data back to some distant home planet.  I think we now have four probes that have passed out of our solar system, but we have only sent astronauts to the moon, so a robotic probe seems far more likely than exploring aliens.

In general terms, I find the "supernatural" to be an interesting field to consider.  It may or may not be real, but only by investigation will we learn what is true about it and what is fantasy.  By merely decreeing it to be fantasy we do not do the advancement of knowledge any service.

The point "as soon as we can explain the "supernatural", it becomes natural" has multiple levels to understand it! I propose that if we consider the human being as composed of soma, psyche, and pnuema (body, soul, and spirit) as was done for over a millennium, that "supernatural" does indeed become "natural". But I would disagree if "natural" implies we will have a physical-only knowledge of this phenomena. We have accepted for about 150 years that the boundary of Natural Science comes when one tries to venture beyond the physical because physical tools cannot measure or weigh beyond this boundary. But we have life nonetheless. And we have NDE (near death experiences) that can be researched. Wine tasters agree on the best wines. Can we approach quality with science?  I think our challenge is to find a way to extend science beyond this boundary!  

Andrew, I fully agree that "natural" extends beyond the physical,  However, I would also argue that based on my experiences, at least some of the "physical laws" seem to apply beyond the physical also.  I am trying to write a paper to explain some aspects of NDE's (the two differing darknesses) by applying "physical laws" to non-physical experiences.  I don't claim to be certain as to how these "laws" transcend the physical, but I think they do somehow.

William, may I suggest in your research look into the dimensions that were experienced by those going through NDE. Was it 3-D or 2-D pictures? Was time different? People claim that one thing they saw was a panorama of their life such that the spatial movement of one's field of vision in physical life seemed to be replaced by a time movement. 

Andrew, I suspect that extra dimensions do enter into NDE experiences in some ways.  I also recognize that time seems to flow differently in NDE's, including potentially backwards.  Such would be compatible with the union of relativity and quantum theories that leads to a solution for energy that requires negative or backwards moving time.    It does not appear to be easy, but I suspect that if I am right that it is possible then it might well be our mindset that makes it hard to do.

If by supernatural you mean unmeasurable, then no, science cannot address the supernatural (whether or not anything supernatural exists).

But science can measure people's beliefs and perceived experiences based on what those people consider supernatural. 

The word ''Natural'' is often used to mean what can be explained through a scientific model or is expected to be explained by a scientific model.  The word ''Natural'' could also to be used into a more general meaning that qualify all phenomena that can be observed but not necessary explained without having to assume that it can be explained scientifically in terms of models. For example, the phenomenal living experience that we shared such as seeing, touching, feeling joice,  thinking, etc are consider natural but not necessarily reducible to a scientific explanation.  Most phenomenologist will argue that they cannot be reduced to a scientific explanation and a majority of cognitive scientists will assume that they can be reduced to a scientific explanation but both group will agree that these are natural phenomena but the later group used Natural in the restricted meaning and the later group used Natural in the second meaning.  

In all societies there is a tradition of revelation about a super-natural realm with God, or with spirit usually in relation with the world and with humans.  Philosophers and scientist that were born in these tradition either choose the naturalistic philosophical/scientific tradition as excluding a priori the supernaturalistic tradition or choose them as two different mode of revelation of the world compatible but not reducible to each other.  It is my position.

It looks like that author of question want to ask indirectly that will scientific studies be able some time to go beyond those lines which religion draw for human. E.g, the religion says there are angels, there is soul, universe is governed by God, there are metaphysical miracles etc etc, 

So for author the answer is that that such proves are liable to those who claim so, however step by step the knowledge provided by religions sometime comes under research and experimentation as well. So first chose which frame of reference is acceptable for you to access the reality and why you need it, then search for it.