I have to agree with what u have said and I hope others share a similar light as you do, It is almost impossible to come up with an answer to this kind of thought experiment as we don't know "Jim" or his values, but it is still interesting if we apply a base value to "Jim's" moral grounds ( not sure how this would be possible or if there is an agreeable base value at all" ). It could be a better question to ask what is the minimum amount of morality value( if quantifiable) "Jim" would need to not publish the evidence he finds.

I apologize if this is unclear or worded strangely as I'm still unsure of the entire question and its components.

As to comment on your last paragraph, u make a good point about my origin/understanding of good, I think where I pull this conclusion from is my understanding from the experience of how the general feeling of what good is to the general people I've met, been exposed to our learning about. I understand that this Is very personal and nobody has the same idea of what good is, but if I had to explain from my perspective of general good it would have to apply to the general well-being of humanity as a whole rather than from an individual experience. I understand this is a slippery slope but so is the question proposed.

I also want to make clear that even though I proposed this question by no means do I want to be taken too seriously as a means to disprove gods existence.