You say "there is no proof of something like that existing"... yet there is also no proof that it does Not exist.
Therefore, non-belief in a religion is just as illogical as belief in one.
Basically, this is fallacious.
You're saying that because we can't know something both sides are equally possible to be valid, which is simply not true. This is the basis of all "joke religions" like Pastafarians; since you can't prove that the Flying Spaghetti Monster doesn't exist as much as you can't prove that a god doesn't exist, a god and the FSM are equally likely to be true.
Think of it as invinsible unicorns. You can believe many things about them, e.g:
*Invisible unicorns don't exist
*There are invisible pink unicorns
*There are invisible green unicorns
*There are invisible spotted unicorns
*There are invisible striped unicorns
*There are invisible unicorns with only 3 legs
*There are invisible unicorns with monocles
If you argue that the first option is not the most likely one, I'd like to follow your train of thought.
EDIT: in fact, the set of possible beliefs is infinite, just a clarification.