[Vasu]

There has to be tangible evidence if there's been a murderer. the body itself would be evidence. unless of course you're referring to a case in which the person just drops dead for no apparent reason, scientific, medical, you're looking at something unexplainable, correct? Therefore you wouldnt be able to charge the person in the first place. I dont see how this really relates to faith, though, seeing as we're talking in faith that a physical being did something. not a spiritual one.

What I meant is that there is no tangible evidence to suggest that Mr. Smith has committed the murder, but you have faith that he did. Can we convict him?

As for the physical and spiritual thing, there ids not even a shred of evidence to suggest that "spiritual" beings exist, and you must have something to back up such a preposterous suggestion.

And writing is a bit different than creating complicated pictures in extremely small spaces.

Seems there's a reasonable explanation for this in the Wikipedia passage that you quoted.

In response to the eye miracles, Joe Nickell and John F. Fischer wrote in Skeptical Inquirer that images seen in the Virgin's eyes are the result of the human tendency to form familiar shapes from random patterns, much like a psychologist's inkblots—a phenomenon known as religious pareidolia.[42]

This makes perfect sense. Dawkins talks about this too in the God Delusion. His own personal experience was included for that matter.