Yes. There is no reason to keep holding that door open. If evidence is later found, we can always reopen it.

Agnostics are ignorant about stuff (usually gods) existing. Atheists lack belief in stuff (specifically gods) existing

The claim about fairies playing a role in gravity would require some sort of justification. It is a state of affairs that is presently unknown and perhaps unknowable. Have mythic creatures such as pixies and fairies ever been shown to exist? Why does an agnostic have any responsibility to adjudicate that? Why place any burden on them versus the person making the fairy claim from the outset? Most would only care about stuff that can be explored and given some sort of scientific support. The fairies causing gravity notion isn’t in that league and as with any outlandish speculation subject to a Russell’s teapot.

I now know why philosophy died.

Not at all, if you are agnostic about one issue, why should you be agnostic about all of them. I may be agnostic about is 'C' equal to 'D' but sure that 'A' does not equal 'B'.

Why is it wrong to be inconsistent ? When going out, I put a warm coat in my car in winter and a sun hat in summer. How is my inconsistency wrong ?

I suspect you're thinking more of the the principle of Occam's razor. From Wikipedia, this philosophical razor advocates that when presented with competing hypotheses about the same prediction, one should select the solution with the fewest assumptions. That is, the simplest explanation is the best.

No, god is everything, not a god(s). Or maybe not. Who knows. We Agnostics try to change the subject but you absurdists keep forcing us to laugh.

Yes and no.

Provide at least one exanple of inconsistency or its opposite.