I think you’re mistaking the fallacy. That fallacy is best applied when someone asserts certainty in absence, as in the case of God. If someone just asserts so

I think you’re mistaking the fallacy. That fallacy is best applied when someone asserts certainty in absence, as in the case of God. If someone just asserts some random thing, it’s reasonable to ask for evidence. While their lack of evidence does not disprove their point, it’s certainly an argument for being skeptical about their point. Otherwise I get to assert that every atom is a superintelligence, and your inability to provide contrary evidence is a point in my favor.