People have different notions of what “qualia” means. To me, the experience of qualia is the perception of qualities, or of the texture, of inner processings of the brain. Not consciously experiencing them doesn’t mean that these qualities aren’t there, just like not consciously experiencing sounds wouldn’t mean that the sounds aren’t there, and may be unconsciously processed.

I don’t think that “experience as such” makes any sense. Experience is always of something. And that in turn implies that the something that is being experienced also exists independently of it being experienced.

Yeah, I think you are right. "The content of consciousness" and "consciousness" are different things, and I mixed them up, when writing that sentence. I can watch the content, but not other parts that may be producing it.

Moreover, thinking about it, I come to a conclusion, that if I cannot reflect on qualia creation, then it is a (weak) evidence for qualia created by consciousness. I suppose the consciousness is harder to reflect on than other things, hard to map it into states of the content of consciousness. Like, I can reflect on my vision and see some hints on how I get these wonderful pictures, despite it being definitely not consciousness, I can reflect on how I produce or decode language. And to my mind it is because consciousness was devised to reflect on these things, so I could report on my observations to others. But to reflect on itself is a wholly different matter.

We can't even meaningfully prove that human beings have qualia