I start with my take then I quote from Dr. Rupert Sheldrake's own article.

My Take : People these days seem to be «suffering» from a SERIOUS «aphasia» condition where they do NOT seem to know the ACTUAL «meaning(s)» of words... such as when people say phrases like «it's just a theory» or «it's not a theory» as IF though the word «theory» automatically makes it false or untrue or not backed by any evidence, when in fact, the DEFINITION (scientific) of the word «theory» IS that is in FACT «backed by evidence» to support its claims.

So, when the MSM has historically used phrases like «evidence-free conspiracy THEORIES» they are essentially GAS-LIGHTNING the public with Oxy-Morons; Calling it «Evidence-Free» is a CONTRADICTION of the very word «theory» and «the masses» have apparently been successfully «socially engineered» into using words INCORRECTLY. Language needs a STRONGER BASE where MEANINGS & DEFINITIONS of words cannot be so easily bastardised & twisted.
---------------------
«He then said that in a romantic spirit he himself would like to believe in telepathy, but there just wasn't any evidence for it. He dismissed all research on the subject out of hand. He compared the lack of acceptance of telepathy by scientists such as himself with the way in which the echo-location system had been discovered in bats, followed by its rapid acceptance within the scientific community in the 1940s. In fact, as I later discovered, Lazzaro Spallanzani had shown in 1793 that bats rely on hearing to find their way around, but sceptical opponents dismissed his experiments as flawed, and helped set back research for well over a century. However, Richard recognized that telepathy posed a more radical challenge than echo-location. He said that if it really occurred, it would "turn the laws of physics upside down," and added, "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."

"This depends on what you regard as extraordinary", I replied. "Most people say they have experienced telepathy, especially in connection with telephone calls. In that sense, telepathy is ordinary. The claim that most people are deluded about their own experience is extraordinary. Where is the extraordinary evidence for that?"

He produced no evidence at all, apart from generic arguments about the fallibility of human judgment. He assumed that people want to believe in "the paranormal" because of wishful thinking.»
-Quoted from https://www.sheldrake.org/reactions/richard-dawkins-comes-to-call

English is not my native language, but as I understand it, the term "proof" delivers the meaning of 100% certainty, just like something is water-proof, or a vest is bullet-proof.

In that sense, what I described as so called "positive proof" in this thread:

➡️ https://www.farsightprime.com/forums/general/72369-proof-is

... actually is not proof, but just a collection of convincing evidence that supports a theory. People call it proof because they are convinced that it can withstand any pressure (until it doesn't). It's like you saying your rain boots are water-proof, but then you discover a hole you didn't see before. Positive proof in that sense is like logical inductive reasoning: It's always dependent on the circumstances. And as the circumstances can change – maybe you or someone else made a mistake – it cannot give you prognostic certainty.

"Calling it «Evidence-Free» is a CONTRADICTION of the very word «theory»"

The correct word for evidence-free theory is "fiction". People have the ability to create and propagate images that don't reflect reality for the purpose of playing with ideas, but those aren't theories. For example, the TV show Game of Thrones is not a theoretical investigation of how dragons behave – it's just a fictional play.