The Rationality of Worshipping Nessie

[hmmm_tea]

feanelwa recently shared this quiz about consistency of beliefs, which somehow I seem to have mostly made it through ok inspite of generally being all over the place.

Anyway before I get on with failing to accept where they tell me I'm wrong, let's add an extra question to their quiz:

[Poll #1606918]

So, question 10 says:

If, despite years of trying, no strong evidence or argument has been presented to show that there is a Loch Ness monster, it is rational to believe that such a monster does not exist.

Now, to me, if you have a situation like this where you've got no strong evidence or argument to demonstrate the case either way, it's perfectly rational to believe either existence, non-existence or uncertainty. The one you choose is then a matter of belief. (Personally I don't believe in the Loch Ness monster, but am open to arguments to the contrary)

Hence this is true.

Now 12 says:

As long as there are no compelling arguments or evidence that show that God does not exist, atheism is a matter of faith, not rationality.

Now, again, to me, if you have a situation like this where you've got no strong evidence or argument to demonstrate the case either way, it's perfectly rational to believe either existence, non-existence or uncertainty. The one you choose is then a matter of belief. (Personally I don't believe in God, but am open to arguments to the contrary) (Can you tell I just cut and pasted that argument and swapped Nessie for God?)

Hence this is also true.

To me, my answers given the reasoning behind them are perfectly consistent, but apparently they're not. The answer to both questions would still be the same even if you swapped the being in question.

However, now I've have my intellectual inferiority pointed out to me, I will have to bow to the superiors and start worshiping Nessie as God.

I think this may be why I generally don't take internet quizzes...