Absence of Evidence and Evidence of Absence

―Absence of evidence isn’t evidence of absence‖ is a slogan that is popular among scientists and nonscientists alike. This paper assesses its truth by using a probabilistic tool, the Law of Likelihood. Qualitative questions (―Is E evidence about H?‖) and quantitative questions (―How much evidence does E provide about H?‖) are both considered. The paper discusses the example of fossil intermediates. If finding a fossil that is phenotypically intermediate between two extant species provides evidence that those species have a common ancestor, does failing to find such a fossil constitute evidence that there was no common ancestor? Or should the failure merely be chalked up to the imperfection of the fossil record? The transitivity of the evidence relation in simple causal chains provides a broader context, which leads to discussion of the finetuning argument, the anthropic principle, and observation selection effects.