The Historically Critical Problem with Historical Criticism

Historical Criticism, at least the atheistic kind, seems to have this inherent problem of always following the flawed logic below:

"Here is this difficulty, and that therefore means this is one way how this couldn't have occurred this way. Therefore it did not occur this way." Lots of effort is put into showing how this one certain way couldn't or probably didn't happen, and so therefore it seems big brained.

But not as much effort is put into "well here is one way, or here are certain ways this could have occurred this way, and so it didn't necessarily not occur this way, and in fact due to this being the tradition it probably did occur this way because that is what was passed on and this is the best explanation for the tradition."

Because history inherently only occurs one certain way, we should expect that the exact certain way it did occur wouldn't necessarily be recorded in history or able to be known with absolute certainty, just as many things in our own lives would not be discoverable with absolute certainty after we die.