it is worth noting that the scientific community generally does not accept the distinction made by Ken Ham between operational and historical science. Scientists view the scientific method as a comprehensive approach that encompasses both the study of present-day phenomena and the investigation of past events. They consider the distinction between operational and historical science to be artificial and misleading.
Scientists studying evolutionary biology or other historical sciences rely on a wide range of empirical evidence, including fossils, DNA analysis, comparative anatomy, and geological records. They formulate hypotheses, make predictions, and subject their ideas to rigorous testing and peer review. While there may be uncertainties and ongoing debates within scientific fields, the overall consensus within the scientific community is that evolution is a well-supported theory and an essential framework for understanding the diversity of life on Earth.
In summary, Ken Ham's distinction between historical science and operational science is a unique perspective associated with his belief in biblical creationism. The scientific community, on the other hand, does not support such a division and regards the scientific method as a unified approach to investigating the natural world, both past and present.