Are you insinuating that I am subconsciously insecure about my worldview? If so, thanks for the splendid psychoanalysis. 

Perhaps, but I would have to refine that statement a little bit. Who is more humble, the scientist who looks at the universe with an open mind and accepts whatever the universe has to teach him, or somebody who is close minded to objective evidence and scientific inquiry, but still come with truth-claims about the universe (claims that sometimes run contrary to our best understanding of our universe)?

It is often a common misunderstanding that atheists and/or scientists are so arrogant in their worldview. Sure this may be the case for someone, but far from everyone. When scientists don't know something, they admit it. Pretending to know something you actually don't is a huge liability in scientific work, yet this is what many spiritual and religious people do. People of spiritual and religious faith praise themselves for their humility and open minds, while at the same time claiming to know things they can't possibly know, and that no scientist knows. A good scientist goes where the evidence and most plausible explanations take him, while trying to avoid cognitive biases. This isn't arrogance, it is called intellectual honesty. Science changes its mind all the time according to evidence available - i.e it is provisional, and this is the strength of science.

Should there for instance be conclusive evidence produced that God exists, that heaven exists, that the supernatural exists or something, good scientists would be the first to admit they were wrong and chase this evidence hard. At the same time many spiritual and religious people alltogether ignore evidence and scientific inquiry.

I suggest everyone (especially you SpartanII) takes a look at this video, Open-mindedness, to get things straight in this matter and see what I mean.