Is this correct?
Science, qua science, must do this; its very raison d'être is to replace the supernatural by the natural, the unknown by the known, fable by fact, and while it is engaged upon this task it must be provisionally atheistic or cease to be itself.
Basil Willey: Darwin's Place in the History of Thought; Page 15
Science is obviously adept at replacing unknowns by knowns. Most papers I read do not deal with fables but I don't doubt the capacity to dispel them for those that do address issues about which fables can be identified. Since supernatural is by definition that which is not natural, dispelling the supernatural is either a semantic device or an attempt at a clever ruse.