I hadn’t heard about the “technique” of claiming that since history is not directly observable, testable and repeatable, it has no validity in a scientific context and therefore (not sure if this is stated explicitly) is on an equal or inferior rational footing with religion.
Wow. The religionists are very creative in coming up with ways to slap away the hand of science that hovers over their substance-less “theories” and threatens at any time to sweep them away. The thing is, this thinking is fundamentally invalid, like every other creationist “technique” I’ve encountered. I won’t repeat the whole debunking of this “technique” since you can just read the article.
The variety of tactics religionists take to fool themselves and others into accepting their absurd ideas is interesting. It could make a good class on how to recognize fraudulent thinking. The better ones, like the “irreducible complexity” argument a nutbar confidently laid out for me 8 years ago, are fascinating, because they require real thought to discover the underlying false premises.