Evidence is not proof, it is evidence. It is still valuable because it can guide the way to experiments that give us empirical proof, or refutation of the conjecture.
They're not the target audience of scientific papers.
Perhaps putting that context into publications would be more effective?
It's called introduction
But research publishing is a traditionally internal dialog among people who ostensibly spent years being inducted into a common contextual foundation.
Post-web journalism and open access publishing might be challenging that tradition, but the answer is probably not to staple an introductory textbook to every paper.