It should bother any smart person when someone says "you cannot prove a universal negative" only to turn around and say "there is no evidence of X."

This statement is a contradiction. If you cannot prove a universal negative, then how can you say there is no evidence of X?

They should be saying "we have not YET found any evidence." Science should be open to evidence. The fact that most say "There is NO evidence" shows that they are very much biased.

I guess saying "no evidence" just makes makes them sound more certain and confident right? A persuasion similar to appeal to ridicule.