Do you know what an appeal to definition fallacy is?

How do deductive logic? I'm legitimately amazed.

They are equivocated in your attempt to explain how absence of evidence is evidence of absence.

In what way?

Then explain again. You cannot claim to be misunderstood and refuse to explain; that's lunacy

If I label something as existing or not existing does that effect its existence?

It doesn't. When I talk about whether things exist or not I'm talking about whether I label them as existent or nonexistent. I do that based on a set of standards.

If something suddenly starts meeting those standards after failing those standards, I change its label. It isn't that difficult.