Except that we've seen plenty of times that "non-physical" evidence doesn't exist and has never been relevant, and usually there's a better physical explanation

Except that we've seen plenty of times that "non-physical" evidence doesn't exist and has never been relevant, and usually there's a better physical explanation. So by default, it's fair to assume that non-physical evidence doesn't exist, and if you use that in argument, the burden of proof is yours. I'm open to accepting non-physical evidence if you can prove it exists. If you can, that would be very interesting, but it's likely that you can't. Again, anecdotes and tradition aren't evidence.