Naturalistic vs. Supernatural Explanations

Take any ‘odd’ or surprising fact to be explained (e.g., cosmic fine-tuning, origin of life, consciousness, etc.).

I continue to be suprised that anyone thinks

“God caused/designed/did X for an unknown reason using a mysterious mechanism”

is a better explanation than

“X has an unknown naturalistic explanation, i.e., X is the result of an impersonal, unknown mechanism”

The first option, call it a “personal supernaturalist” (PS) explanation, involves both an unknown reason and an unknown mechanism. In contrast, the second option, call it a naturalistic (N) explanation 2 involves only an unknown mechanism. For this reason alone, it seems to me that, everything else held equal, N explanations should be preferred to PS explanations. And notice this is before we even compare the track records of PS and N explanations, which only makes things worse for the PS camp.