Is the statement "Claims demand evidence" always true?

[emjay]

Basically the problem I'm having in conceptualising direct realism vs indirect realism is that there appears to be essentially no difference between saying 'object x has properties a, b, c and essentially conditional sub properties d, e, and f that are dependent on a certain interaction or observer' and saying that those properties are found in the observer. The only difference I can see is that it gives the objects 'out there' an almost magical inherent 'knowledge' (for want of a better word) of all the different ways they could be interacted with. So it seems to me to just needlessly overcomplicate the matter.