Im not here to defend economists, but the historian argument is that because they can’t verify if their arguments holds water robustly they instead don’t verify

Im not here to defend economists, but the historian argument is that because they can’t verify if their arguments holds water robustly they instead don’t verify at all. If everything is so subjective as to be unverifiable then why should we care about history at all? I think in reality history is much more tied to present and many claims can be verified to some degree (of not absolute) certainty.