And life is not supernatural, rather destroying your hyperbolic claim that the origin of everything must be supernatural, you can’t have it both ways.
As was lightning once, thar she blowssss…god of the gaps ahoy!
Is life natural? Only you have repeatedly asserted it can only have had supernatural origins, which is it I wonder?
No, like you…
Magic
noun
the power of apparently influencing events by using mysterious or supernatural forces.
Only in making bald claims to possess them, quelle surprise.
I am a genius with an IQ of 220, and Nobel prize in some “stuff”, but I have no interest in evidencing discussing those claims. 
I have cured cancer, but I am waiting for sceptics to come on board.
Yeah, like me curing cancer…
This is getting spooky…
Tell it to a crocodile…
I’ve decided to interpret that as false, and if your rationale has any merit then my interpretation is no less valid than anyone else’s. Or we can weigh claims based on objectively evidence. I assume you simply don’t worry about seeing a doctor when ill, as anyone’s subjective opinion will do? 
As objectively as I am able, and thus without your emotional closed minded bias in favour of your a priori belief in a deity.
Yes that’s the sort of bias I mean, and when you present some objective evidence we can see how I examine it, and then comment objectively, until then you’re simply using a poisoning of the well fallacy, your claim this applies only to people who don’t share your theistic belief (atheists) is of course a no true Scotsman fallacy.
Please explain your own criteria for recognizing evidence for wapadooks. He was funny fair play…
Obviously because we all lack belief before we start to examine claims, it’d be pretty bizarre to form beliefs for things we can’t define, or even comprehend evidence to support, as you seem to be suggesting I do.
Cough bs cough…
I believe the world is not flat and not at the centre of the universe, are you seriously going to claim this is equally as subjective as the best colour is blue? Funnier and funnier, but the same false equivalence he tried to peddle at the very start, we’ve seen this canard floated by too many apologists.
A walk down memory lane…but enough for now.