It's only ridiculous because you keep trying to prove something you can't.<quoted text>
This is something the scientific community calls falsifiability.
Absence of evidence is evidence of absence. Perhaps the wording confuses you.
Is there a kitten in the box?
Lack of kitten observation is demonstration of kitten missing.
I know you just like to argue but this is getting ridiculous.
Your observation of the box in question is evidence.
So it is not absence of evidence.
Your evidence cannot be both absent and present.
The scientific community, you say?
The absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence.
― Carl Sagan; "Cosmos"
It's only getting uglier for you.