How about: maybe some things lie outside of the purview of empiricism and materialism, the belief in which does not radically impact one's behavior so long as they have a decent moral compass otherwise, can be taken on faith, and "proving" it does exist or doesn't exist is a pointless argument, since it exists outside of that ontological system.

It's much harder to prove the non-existence of something than the existence.

The burden of proof lies on those who say it exists, not the other way around.

Before we start discussing whether it's "real" can we all agree on what it "is"? I doubt it.