When is a miracle a miracle?

Here's how things went down. I said to my buddy beetle496: "are you saying there is an account of how non-directed processes produced the vast store of biological information in the DNA molecule? If so, can you provide a reference in the literature for that account?:

beetle496 directed me to this website which was admirably brief: http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/CB102.html

The only problem is that I didn't find an answer to my question. This brief article notes how genetic information and complexity can increase through random mutations. But I was asking for evidence that DNA and RNA were originally assembled through wholly undirected processes. I didn't find even a pretense to providing that account in the citation provided.

Recently Steve Myer published a six hundred page tome titled Signature in the Cell arguing that the digital code in DNA is best explained by a designing intelligence. I haven't read the book yet, though I would be interested in critiques from those who have.

Anyway, this leaves me uncertain about which conclusion to draw. So while I'm waiting for an account for the origin of DNA that is undirected, I'll take the time to argue against any such account in principle in a way that is sure to elicit frustrated eye rolls from my atheist, skeptical, agnostic, humanistic readers (but which I think is none the worse for that fact). 

Here's the argument. Fastforward twenty years. Meteorology has made extraordinary advances in understanding the natural world. So much so that the meteorologist can make accurate weather forecasts a day in advance, so accurate in fact, that the forecast can predict the exact place that every rain drop, snowflake, or hail pellet will hit the ground. Extraordinary!

Now the forecast for tomorrow comes in and alas, cumulus thunderheads are on their way promising a violent thunderstorm. With the forecast comes a complete description of staggering complexity for the position that each golf ball sized hail pellet over the forecast area will hit the earth.

Since beetle496's birthday is tomorrow he is taking close note of the forecast over his house. He is especially concerned to make sure that none of the golf ball sized hail pellets hit the big tent on the lawn where the party will be held.

So he goes to weather.com and types in the coordinates for his house to receive an accurate forecast. With relief he sees that no hail pellets will hit his tent. But then with amazement he sees that a couple dozen pellets will hit his lawn ... and when they do they will spell out "Happy Birthday beetle496!"

This information comes as the result of a forecast based upon a nearly perfect knowledge of the operative scientific laws in weather systems. And as predicted, the hail falls the next day and spells out "Happy Birthday beetle496!"  

Ought beetle496 conclude that this event, which from one perspective is wholly explicable and predicted by the best science of the day, is purely a natural event? Or ought he to conclude that somehow, an intelligence is wishing him a happy birthday through the supple operation of the laws of nature?