What are you talking about Chris? It wasn’t me who claimed that they haven’t. Or are you claiming that I am a sockpuppet of @Sealkin?
In any case, just because something claims to be evidence doesn’t mean that it actually is evidence. It has to be actually true in the first place, and it has to respect the basic principles of measurement and mathematics. If it didn’t, then we could say things such as “We know that cars can run on gravy because bananas are marsupials and salmon live in trees and eat pencils.”
By that standard, these claims are not evidence. Therefore @Sealkin’s statement is correct regardless.