
I see two problems with this line of thinking. First, it assumes that because you know one (or three or five) facts and another person doesn't know them, the other person is stupid or ignorant. And in order to believe that, you have to think that what you know is important and what someone else knows is unimportant. That's not a position I'd want to take.
Second, people forget that when they lived through events, that makes them news, and not history. To a kid born in 1990, knowing details about the Vietnam War is the same as someone born in 1950 knowing details about the Paris peace conference of 1919. If I had to bet, I'd bet neither person knew anything about either one.
So if you want to say nobody knows anything, maybe I'd agree with you.
