Absence records should be displayed more clearly

[MattBlissett]

"Elanus caeruleus (Desfontaines, 1789) observed in Norway"

| individual count  | 0      |
| occurrence status | absent |

Perhaps the subtitle needs rewording to "absence recorded" or similar.

See also https://github.com/gbif/portal16/issues/308 and https://github.com/gbif/portal-feedback/issues/1206

[MortenHofft]

I believe the plan still is to remove it from the index completely. And if I understood correctly to do so very soon

[MortenHofft]

Should be better now - but of course we could do much more throughout the site. But there are other issues for that https://www.gbif.org/occurrence/1657415136

[MortenHofft]

There can be conflicting information on the record. e.g.

| individual count  | 0      |
| occurrence status | present |

| individual count  | 10      |
| occurrence status | absent |

what should we do in those situations? It is a data issue and a question of how many cases there is like that. I'm labelling it for data product

[MattBlissett]

That's probably something that should be intepreted, and be given an issue.

[MattBlissett]

This will now be handled in https://github.com/gbif/pipelines/issues/268