In what way is ‘We need more evidence to know either way’ not a clear position? How is that weasel words? Feigning confidence of certainty in the absence of cl

In what way is ‘We need more evidence to know either way’ not a clear position? How is that weasel words? Feigning confidence of certainty in the absence of clear evidence is not scientific. This isn’t a problem about consensus, it’s a problem about evidence. I agree that scientific communicators and scientists should think for themselves and read widely and draw their own conclusions, but sometimes the evidence isn’t there to support a belief either way. Is that really dodging something?