Iknewit, I went and checked your definitions. They were incomplete; you cherry picked and whittled down what the dictionaries said to change the definitions to say what you wanted them to say.
Like most real dictionary defintions, these of course tend to have multiple meanings attached to the word:
Encarta:
- not of natural world: relating to or attributed to phenomena that cannot be explained by natural laws
- relating to deity: relating to or attributed to a deity
- magical: relating to or attributed to magic or the occult
Oxford:
1 attributed to some force beyond scientific understanding or the laws of nature.
2 exceptionally or extraordinarily great.
Webster:
1 : of or relating to an order of existence beyond the visible observable universe; especially : of or relating to God or a god, demigod, spirit, or devil
2 a : departing from what is usual or normal especially so as to appear to transcend the laws of nature b : attributed to an invisible agent (as a ghost or spirit)
Cambridge:
- caused by forces that cannot be explained by science: Ghosts and evil spirits are supernatural. She is said to have supernatural powers and to be able to communicate with the dead.
American Heritage:
- Of or relating to existence outside the natural world.
- Attributed to a power that seems to violate or go beyond natural forces.
- Of or relating to a deity.
- Of or relating to the immediate exercise of divine power; miraculous.
- Of or relating to the miraculous.
Ultralingua:
- Not existing in nature or subject to explanation according to natural laws; not physical or material; “supernatural forces and occurrences and beings.”
Based on the ACTUAL definitions, we note that the supernatural is ‘beyond’ or ‘outside’ nature, and/or somehow “not subject to explanation”. Note also that “not subject to explanation” does NOT mean “has not been explained”, or even “cannot be explained”. It means you can’t even TRY. This applies to Gods, maybe, but certainly not the placebo effect or dark matter.
The fact is, none of your little examples of ‘unexplained things’ even qualifies as supernatural, unless you intend to invoke a diety, ghost, or magical force as its cause. Which might maybe apply to spontaneous healing, but not the rest.
We also note that there are a heck of a lot of references to gods, spirits, and ‘forces’ in these defintions. This is because, contrary to the conclusions you arrived at from your dishonest definitions, the word “supernatural” does in fact refer to spirits, ghosts, gods, boogeymen, and the rest of the supposed supernatural critters. That’s what the word means, which is why the rest of the world disagress with you about your “definition”. Supernatural does NOT mean just any “unknown”, “unexplained”, or “unexplainable” thing; get over it.
Oh, and regarding the OP, if the paranormal were able to be demonstrated on cue, such that it was no longer some fleeting, elusive, or mysterious thing, then it would cease to be paranormal. The rapidity with which scientists and the common masses would recognize that it was now a normal occurence would depend on the amount of examination of it and validation of it as a real thing that occured.