If there’s something “out there” yet is so subtle that it never actually does anything to affect us, then what does it matter what we believe? There’s no use for religions or any sort of belief system to work around this so-subtle-as-to-be-invisible supernatural force. If it doesn’t affect anything, who cares?
No, religions (aside from some weak deists maybe) aren’t formed on the idea that there’s some non-interventional magical force out there. They’re built on the idea that there’s a very specific force, and here’s how he has shaped our world, and here’s how he affects the world we live in, and these are his rules, and this is why you kill infidels, etc. etc.
So either the power out there is so vague and so non-interventional that it doesn’t matter whether it exists, or there’s a power out there that’s specific and that some religion understands and that actively intervenes in our world - and actively intervening in our world would leave evidence. If the Earth formed spontaneously rather than having lots of lines of evidence for a very old, gradually developed planet, that would be evidence. If all the living creatures popped up suddenly at once in functional ecosystems, that would be evidence. If God healed all his loyal followers of all their diseases, that would be evidence. All of this stuff would be testable and observable.
So then we can rule out most forms of religion because they make these testable claims and yet fail (creation didn’t happen like in genesis, etc). The things that these religions believe would be useful - they would tell us something about the world or something about how to live our lives - if they were true. But they aren’t. So we’re left with “uhhh but you can’t prove there’s some vague non-intervening power out there! GOTCHA ATHEISTS HAHAHAHA!”. But what use is that? If something has no effect on our lives and doesn’t have any effect on the natural world, why do you need a belief about it? What purpose does that belief serve?
Religious people like to proclaim some very specific things (this is who god is, here’s his rulebook, etc) but when you start asking for evidence it becomes “hey, you can’t disprove there’s not some vague undetectable power out there! Can’t prove a negative! THEREFORE MY SPECIFIC VIEW OF GOD IS CORRECT!”
God may exist. It’s pretty clear that no religion I’m aware of describes him because they all make factually incorrect claims about the history of the world and nature. Leprechauns may exist. There’s equal evidence and non-evidence for either. There’s simply no reason to believe in either - that doesn’t require a positive statement that they don’t exist. In fact even the more militant atheists will often say “your specific idea of god almost certainly doesn’t exist” rather than “certainly”, and that’s the more logically defensible position, although they’re practically extremely similar.
