I've heard a lot of Christians say that they don't believe in the Flood and many other stories in the Bible.  I ask, if you don't believe many of the Bible's stories and teachings, where do you draw the line?  Isn't it just you following whatever you like in the Bible and ignoring things you don't agree with, de facto creating your own religious worldview that was not presented to you by your religion in the first place?

Also, from statistics I've seen, 95% of physicists are atheist, the highest concentration of atheists for any occupation.

Yes and happiness is just a chemical reaction in the brain.

Just so you know, I would definitely not be classified as a Christian by any Christian's standards today. I do believe however that Jesus wouldn't disagree with what I have to say (mostly).

True, but with which one would you rather live without?

A) You do realize that believing in god =/= atheism.   So you were wrong.

B)  The problem you have listed in that study is it's "Personal belief"  "Personal Disbelief" or Agnostic. 

Which as more recent polls have found skews towards disbelief because...

"A primary complaint of scientists who answered the earlier polls was that the concept of God was limited to a "personal God." Leuba considered an impersonal God as equivalent to pure naturalism and classified advocates of deism as nonbelievers. We designed the current study to distinguish theism from deism—that is to day a "personal God" (theism) versus an "impersonal God" who created the universe, all forces and matter, but does not intervene in daily events (deism). An evolutionist can be considered religious, in our poll, if he calls himself a deist. ..."

In otherwords, Deists were classfied as atheits.

Which was actually largely my point.   I mean, that should of been obvious based on the fact that more people believed in Immortality then god.  I mean that didn't stand out and make you go... "huh?"  You've got to have a more scientific thought process when reading this stuff.  Note the 78% as Naturalists (about 80%) and the rest leaving at least some room for theism and/or deism.

http://sandwalk.blogspot.com/2007/06/evolutionary-biologists-flunk-religion.html

(Note that the URL is saying that scientists are flunking religion, not that scientists have flunked on the case of religion.)

It's funny that the study you quoted ended up being the exact study that was cited by the articles I found as one that was primarily flawed and needed reworking.

I think it may be a bit over the top to say that 90% scientists in certain scientific fields are atheists.

THAT WAS SARCASM.

To believe that would equate to not believing that there is any existence after death since consciousness is just due to the complex interactions of the brain.

I'm just quoting studies I've come across.  Its not that suprising that fields like biology and physics would produce such high numbers of people with disbelief in God, since everything you know runs contrary to what the world's view of religion is.

But isn't that true?

Do you think scientists know anything about consciousness at all? 

There is almost nothing, and a little self-reflection on your part will clearly reveal why.