If something cannot be quantified and measured, then it either does not exist, or the question of its existence is irrelevant because it cannot affect us.
Isn't it more accurate to say that we cannot measure it at this point in our evolution? We are capable of quantifying and measuring things people couldn't dream of 100 years ago.
As for me, in the past year since I've opened my eyes to the troof, thanks to many of you here, I went from true believer to not believing the WTS but still believing in God and the Bible to not believing all of the Bible to not believing any of the Bible (insofar as it being inspired of God - I know the geographic locations mentioned there exist, i.e. Jerusalem - at least they didn't get that wrong ), to being atheist to now being agnostic. I think it's more rational or logical to posit that we aren't sure about such things, thus my being agnostic. Not being able to explain something scientifically is only a measure of where we are at as a species, not necessarily a measure of what is or is not "out there".
All this to say that I would have no difficulty believing some sort of beings/life/energy exist outside our physical realm. Why should we be the end all of everything? On the other hand, I know I'll probably never know for sure unless science takes a quantum leap forward in my lifetime in the ability to measure such things, or unless there actually is another "realm" out there and we'll find out after death.
Of course, I've come a long way in the past year and if you ask the same question next year maybe my answer will be totally different. Which is why agnosticism suits me very well!
How's that for a straight answer ?