Nothing that I have written here (in context) shows an error regarding ‘ontological’ and ‘methodological’ naturalism.
The context of my statements refer specifically to the practice of evolutionists attempting to redefine ‘science’ to be a search for “naturalistic explanations.” Such a ‘definition’ preemptively excludes creation as a possible scientific explanation.
It is irrelevant if the evolutionist is also a proponent of ‘ontological naturalism’, or if they are just a proponent of the more limited ‘methodological naturalism’. The end result is the same as far as their philosophy of science goes.
To both, ‘science’ is the search for “naturalistic” explanations. Period.