The reason is, of course, that there are no scientific facts. There are hypotheses, theories, and observations. There is a scientific method, which attempts to connect them together.
This is a deeply unsettling perspective to a lot of people who demand something science can't deliver but which religion can, and I'd count the author among them.
Whenever an author starts tooting about "scientific facts" I sense an agenda. And it's often followed by demands that I submit to it.
Elsewhere, the author pitches the book like so:
> My new book Identifying Future-Proof Science argues that we can confidently identify many scientific claims that are future-proof: they will last forever (so long as science continues). Examples include the evolution of human beings from fish, and the fact that the Milky Way is a spiral galaxy. ...
https://petervickersphilosophy.com/publications/
The first claim is laughable. Without a path for abiogenesis (there is none yet), claims this specific about evolution are anything but "fact." And the tautology of classifying the Milky Way galaxy as a galaxy makes me wonder if the author has problems with basic logic.