Take it easy my friend. I know it is hard for a Bayesian to accept this harsh truth, but this is why you missed the entire point. Change the hypothesis to:
H3 : “All swans are white”
And now, all of a sudden, observing a blue ball is an evidence, as small as it might be, in favor of hypothesis H3, and it is equally an evidence in favor of “All ravens are black”. Does that sound right to you. Worse yet. Observing a red ball is also a slight evidence in favor of
H4: “All ravens are white”
So how could the same observation be equally an evidence of two conflicting hypothesis (all ravens are black & all ravens are white)?

It’s OK… but please accept the harsh truth… Bayesian inference has been proven to be unsound by smart logicians LONG TIME AGO. Accept it. Or not (up to you), but use scientific reasoning, not bad language….

Best