I will just say that if you believe in God and miracles then you don't need an alternative explanation for [anything]Not at all. Here's a crude thought experiment: suppose you believed in a God who performed confirmed miracles, but who had only performed two or three in recorded history. Now suppose you lost your wallet and spent five minutes looking for it, without success. Would it be rationally responsible, at that point, to ascribe its disappearance to divine intervention?
How long and how hard would you have to look before that even made it onto the list of hypotheses?
Just because God can do anything doesn't mean that's always a good explanation.
In fact, to a naive observer, secularists are kind of in the same boat. Bear with me for a moment:
There's an intelligent design argument that says the laws of physics for this universe are extremely fine-tuned; change any number of physical constants by even a small amount, and the universe never develops stars.
The response to that goes, this is just the one universe we can see; there may be many others with different constants. And while this particular setup might be improbable, it's what we have to see in order to be here.
The response to that goes, if you can go invoking a practically infinite number of unseen universes, what's the point of trying to explain anything? Invoke a few more universes, and you could write anything off as chance.
And the response to that goes, roughly, well, you don't want to ascribe things to once-in-a-multiverse events unless you've looked really hard first (like we have with the cosmology stuff).
See? We're kind of in the same boat.
The reality--getting back to miracles--isn't anything like that simple; there is a great diversity of opinion in Christendom about how often God performs miracles, and when, and how you can tell he's done it. But as far as I can tell, they agree on two things: (1) The miracle has to make theological sense (there's usually an obvious reason for it), and (2) It doesn't happen anything like often enough to threaten the effectiveness of science.
Though there are folks who will claim God could have created dinosaur fossils just to test our faith, this is very much a fringe view. Most theologians would be very uncomfortable with the idea that God has behaved in a scientifically deceptive way. Quite the opposite; the entire well-accepted realm of natural theology is based on the idea that God has set up the world to make sense and to be investigated and even to teach us things. If there were evidence to the contrary, it would be profoundly upsetting for a lot of scholars.