Let’s make sure we define the word miracle in the same way: “an event which cannot be explained by natural causes”. I hope we can agree on this definition.
With this definition comes the question: how can we declare that an event was a bona fide miracle? Suppose we see something that our level of knowledge cannot explain. The only honest way to put it: “as of now, our knowledge does not provide a natural explanation”. That does not preclude that the event cannot be explained in natural terms, merely that we don’t have an explanation today.
The event we observe would happen in nature. That is a fact. To state that the cause is supernatural would require omniscience, the person who would assert that would have to know that a natural explanation is forever impossible. Since we have no omniscience, we can never be sure that there is no natural explanation. Therefore it is always an error to declare something miraculous.
Besides, what would qualify as a true miracle? Suppose God came down and would start healing amputees, by the wave of his hand. Would that be a true miracle? It would not. Maybe there is a natural explanation for it. A better example of a miracle would be something that contradicts our knowledge of natrue. If God came down and would declare the next ten Powerball winners, along with the exact amount they will win in the future, now that would be astonishing.
Would it qualify as a miracle? No, it would only tell us, that our understanding of time is incomplete.
Miracles do not exist, only lack of knowledge exists.