Supernatural explanations invariably encounter a wall in their explanations. By definition, the supernatural does not conform to the same set of laws as everything else in perceptible reality. The explanation "God did it" can never ask further questions like how or why he did it.

Naturalistic processes on the other hand are more open to inquiry. We hypothesize, we test, we discover. There are always other questions to ask, more investigations to be done. In a since, this method of explanation will never be complete either, but that is because reality is phenomenally complicated, NOT because we were satisfied with non-answers.

As far as we know, natural processes. But keep in mind there is a lot we don't know, so it's best keep open to the possibilities.

Whenever unexplained phenomenon in the past occurred: Lightning, fire, earthquakes,etc. people always attributed it to Gods or some other sort of supernatural cause, modern day science has proved this all wrong.

We possess more knowledge about reality that goes along the lines of natural processes then we do for the supernatural or of god. Therefore, natural processes better explain reality then deities do. Sure it's possible something other than nature could be a component in reality, but until we come across this we should have no idea whatever else could be a component of reality. Since most discoveries have been proven to be natural, and throughout history, time and time again, supernatural explanations have never shown themselves to be evident, I am going with natural processes.

I'm going to go with Natural processes. If there is a real god, then wouldn't that god be a part of nature, and as such wouldn't any actions of said god be natural processes as well?

From that, I say that regardless of belief in God, natural processes seems to be the logical position.

Natural processes like the sunrise and the sunset explains reality.