...which wasn't the question. You stated that 'educated in science' is an oxymoron. I said otherwise. It's pure sophistry to claim that scientific fact/theory established previously is history (or even mostly history). Yes, certainly, someone established it in a given year and did it in a certain way, but this is irrelevant from the scientific perspective. We simply care that 'this is fact or theory and here is the evidence'. In what rational way can you say that 'nitrogen is generally not found in its elemental form, but typically found as N2 in a triple bond', history? And that's the point, it isn't history. It's something that's just as true today as when it was discovered and still just as relevant to understanding the world. It's integral to understanding something like crop rotation because of nitrogen fixation.
I can only wonder if you're trying to cheapen science by making the comparison to history, where proving anything is nigh impossible. And it's bullocks. Science's trademark is being verifiable or demonstrable but [insert obligatory quotation that not everything is]. And dear god, this is dull. I need some yeast-fermented liquid science. Please excuse me.