The moment science is able to deal with the possibility of a "supernatural being", whatever being that is will cease to be considered supernatural. Supernatural and science are by definition non-intersecting spheres of influence. It's impossible because BY DEFINITION it's impossible, not just because we're unable to concieve of a solution that would reconcile the two. The moment science begins to consider things that are beyond verification, falsifiability, or empirical evidence, it is no longer science!

Also, again, science doesn't prove things, it explains things, and endeavours towards better explanations. Common descent WILL never be proved, I can state that with absolute certainty, just as the theory of GRAVITY will never be proved, because it is philosophically IMPOSSIBLE to prove them correct. Anyone who claims a scientific theory "proven" isn't using the rigorous definition of the word. Science does NOT deal with cast iron proofs, it's not even interested in getting them. If you want proofs, you go to mathematics.

And, by the way, the argument from complexity is a philosophical argument. Just because scientists are saying it doesn't make it scientific!

If we find such evidence, that being wouldn't be supernatural any more.

I am sure that it already happened to some tribes that they found evidence for the existence of their "god" when their god turned out to be an avelanche causing regular floods etc..

Anyone who resorts to a supernatural explanation of anything is not a scientist but someone who has given up on the scientific method.

Your statement is about as useful as the claim that many people are standing, including some who are sitting. It either means that someone who once sat later stood up or that you don't understand the difference between sitting and standing. But it does not mean that standing can be done sitting down.

Hrmm. How's THAT for a confusing analogy, huh?

...I think I understand what you're getting at there...