Generally agreeing with your point -- it is nitpicking. Still it may be good practice to remember to say and think "that's not usable evidence" instead of "that's not evidence".

I think that your arguments about the implied invisible don't pay rent

Eliezers, not mine. And they may not "Pay Rent" but they do, evidently, stand between you and the murdering of your siblings. They also constitute a strictly simpler model for reality than the one you advocate.

Your attempt to use emotionally laden thought experiments

Again, not my attempt, it was multiple other people who were all patiently trying to explain the concepts in a way you might understand.

instead of real arguments about epistemology furthers my skepticism about your beliefs.

The arguments were real. They are what you rejected in the previous sentence. This may or may not mean you actually read them.

The fact that you insist on using your own preferences as evidence for their justification makes your credibility go even lower, because that evidence is so obviously weak that the only reason you would mention it is if you're extremely biased.

I wasn't, and I included careful disclaimers to that effect in both comments. I was merely making an incidental technical correction regarding misuse of the word 'evidence'. You made a point of separating your "intuitive judgement" from your abstract far-mode ideals. When people do this it isn't always the case that the abstract idealized reasoning is the correct part. I often find that people's intuitions have better judgement---and that is what I see occurring here. Your intuitions were correct and also happen to be the side of you that is safer to be around without risk of being murdered.

Mentioning it is a waste of time; I get no predictive power out of the belief in my daughter who I will never see again.

Fortunately, current engineering technology is such that your particular brand existence-denial does not pose an imminent threat. As has been mentioned, if we reached the stage where we were capable of significant interstellar travel this kind of thing does start to matter. If there were still people who believed that things magically disappeared once they were sufficiently far enough away from that person then such individuals would need to be restrained by force or otherwise prevented from taking actions that they sincerely believe would not be murder---in the same way that any other murder attempt is prevented if possible.