How is an event a miracle if it comes about naturally?

You're trying to escape the issue here by replacing space with time: if the miracles are natural, then their timing should have also come about naturally. If the timing is controlled by God, then they are not natural.

Just to clarify, here's an example: suppose that Jehosafatyahu has committed the sin of not doing his laundry on time. A meteorite falls on his house, killing him. Now, Shmuelel the Priest could say that here is a miracle that is a natural punishment by God.
But here's the thing: had Jehosafatyahu _not_ done his laundry, the meteor would still have fallen on his house: if the act is natural, then the meteorite has been on a collision course with Jehosafatyahu's house anyway, and Jehosafatyahu's actions could not have naturally had the effect of significantly altering the meteorite's path.

Most significant miracles in the Bible that I recall are of the above nature: the people punished or aided by the miracles could not have had the effect of naturally stopping them from occuring by changing their behaviour. Therefore, those miracles are either supernatural, or are not miracles at all.

If every event is a miracle then the word "miracle" is meaningless, not just "meaningless to me."
It is the position that you are defending, and those "better sources" are not really available for this specific discussion, now are they?

As for the rest of your message, well, I can only refer you to my previous few messages, otherwise I might risk having to repeat myself.

And as for the last comment, well, conventional, intentionally neutered (by substituting fuel for warhead mass), and widely task-inappropriate ballistic missiles failed to cause significant damage. Big surprise. Do note that the real apprehended risk was the one of non-conventional weaponry, which was eventually not used.

Finally, you again do not give me a way by which I can seperate "real miracles" and "random acts of nature." Unless, of course, every act of nature is completely intentional, in which case what you are advocating is either Calvinism, or "God does bad things to good people and good things to bad people, sometimes, whenever he feels like it," in which case the whole notion of God is irrelevant. (You might as well use Calvinism without needing a God, and the last one makes a good practically irrelevant.)