I don't think I'd be shitting myself as much as all the theists who believed in the wrong god.
Indeed - would depend entirely on whether the god is a vengeful god and if so what their criteria for vengefulness is.
So if there is a vengeful god whose vengefulness is mostly on those who had followed a false god as opposed to those who hadn't followed any god then all well and good.
Or perhaps a god who cares not whether they were worshiped but did care how an individual lived their lives - now that would depend on the 'values' of that god but they might be broadly humanist, so would have no issue with an atheist who largely followed the golden rule nor a christian who lived by 'love your neightbour' but might really not like a hateful homophobic evangelical christian.
Point is that it shows what a simplistic and naive notion Pacal's wager is as it presumes a certain type of god, which we (of course) cannot. If there is a god that god may be of any flavour of the thousands purported to exist by humans over the years ... of indeed completely unlike any god purported to exist by humans. So we are all screwed if god exists and considers dolphins to be the chosen ones and all other species to be cast aside.
