Correct most bad claims like a flying teapot actually have strong evidence against them as well. But the point is meant to harp on unfalsifiable claims.

The problem is that you cannot demonstrate an invisible physics defying teapot is not out there ... its unfalsifiable. You cannot use physics to disprove it... my claims is that it defies physics... etc.

We have extreme amounts if rock solid actual empirical evidence we do not live in a firmament... or flying winged horses... or raising people from the dead... etc is not even reasonably possible... But the problem is unfalsifiable claims. Example I claim physics was different back then... or this horse transcended physics... or the person raising people from the dead could transcend reality. They use some sort of special pleading, I cannot ever prove impossible, and its not even reasonable to expect anyone to debunk these ideas... The only reasonable null hypothesis is non acceptance...

Correct i am not just agnostic towards flying teapots in orbit around earth... I actively have evidence against it, and have knowledge towards its improbability. But the idea is more about staying skeptical and how trivially and useless unfalsifiable, supernatural, or magical claims are. That said... if you can prove em.... go ahead but a massive burden is on you.

edit: While the teapot isn't completely unfalsifiable... and you can talk about levels of unfalsifiability. The burden of proof, a null hypothesis, and skepticism towards wild claims is whats important.