I provided an argument: mathematics is a discipline where we invent axioms and try to find interesting consequences of those axioms. By its nature, there are an infinite number of possible problems. Even if there is a finite number of problems interesting to humans (which could itself be questioned), we don't have any reason to think that we are anywhere close to running out of them. Saying there is "no evidence" for my view is a non sequitur; the burden of proof would be to establish that there's a finite number of interesting problems and that we've, say, exhausted 80% of them.

I don't think I'm the one adding noise here. You've done nothing but put words in my mouth, attack me personally, and use argument from authority instead of responding to the substance of the debate.