Not sure which letter this falls under, but either Heaven or Hell.
B.
No idea. If I had to bet, I’d bet B, but that’s just a guess. If we’re all a simulation, then maybe something else.
There’s also the (slim) possibility that none of us will ever experience our death, and due to the infinite multiverse, will always continue to exist in one possible universe or another (the “quantum immortality” thought experiment).
If you wanted to poll people, why didn’t you post this as a poll?
How do you figure it’s the “least likely?” What schedule of probabilities do you use to calibrate that claim?
Sure, it’s not creative, and sure, it’s boring.
What’s two plus two: go ahead, be creative and exciting. The trouble is anything other than the least creative and boring answer is also wrong.
The fact that there are seventy or eighty different significant religions, and all of them give contradictory answers pretty much makes nonsense of your claim that “B” is “least likely.”
E. Some other thing.
Specifically, we will have all of our experiences uploaded into the cosmic Overmind that caused the material universe to exist. Because the cosmic Overmind has no corporeal manifestation, the only way It has to experience material existence is to play back the recorded experiences that we have lived through.
The question this leads to, of course, is: Am I currently living my experience, or am I just the playback? 
(actually, the most likely one is B)
I will be in the land of eternal barbecue, with fantastic sides.
Two options, Heaven and Hell. Heaven is being eternally in the presence of God. Hell is the opposite, never having access to God. Just how God’s presence will feel, I don’t know for sure, but from what Scripture says we will know each other, be conscious. There will be no pain or sorrows.
Now, this is an option I could enjoy!
B
After I’m dead is going to be just like before I was born.
I am similar but with extremely slight rather than just slight C leanings. I think that it may not be impossible to create technology that will merge our consciousness with the universe, or at least give us that impression. I’m thinking a huge brain network under which we will be in constant communication with all the other brains on earth, so that even when your body dies, the rest of the collective mind will continue to function. Slowly replace your neurons with those that respond collectively so that at the end of the replacement you will be just part of a whole, and there’s no one point in which your brain goes away because it happens so gradually.
Hippie.
I’m too much of a pessimist, alas. I will be in the next land over, the one where everyone brought the potato salad.
The potato salad . . . AAAH! . . . it’s German!
I hope there is fishing in Heaven. I’ll bet it is catch and release though.
B.
And that isn’t just an opinion, it’s reality.
There is no evidence to support other alternatives. We are just animals. We are animals with the ability to reason and with the ability for speech.
Other than that , we are just meat: no different than deer, dogs, squirrels or mice.
As best I know, your question is based on an illusion of what you are – that you are some bright spark of consciousness traveling along a line to a terminus, where you vanish.
However, the correct way of viewing “you” is, as far as I think we know, as a phenomenon with an extent in time just as it has in space, or generally a collection of events in four-dimensional spacetime, sort of a long wiggly worm, with the lateral wiggles representing your various locations in space, and the longitudinal length representing your extent in time. From this point of view, we might say you have always existed, and always will – you’re just a structure in the overall spacetime structure of the universe, albeit one much “shorter” (in its extent in time) than structures like the Earth itself, or the Sun. To object that the “you” of 1995 is nonexistent while the “you” of 2015 exists is as illogical as to argue that where you sit typing exists (because you perceive it) while the back side of the Moon (which you don’t preceive) does not. That is, we do not accept that your failure to perceive events at spatial distance proves they don’t exist – why should we accept that your failure to perceive events at a temporal distance does prove they don’t exist?
You may argue that you can, in principle, go to the dark side of the Moon, whereas you can’t, even in principle, go to 1995. But that isn’t really true. The limitations are actually the same, and are conjoined. What’s true is that you cannot go to certain points in spacetime, starting from certain others. For example, you can’t go to Earth in 1995 starting from Earth in 2015. But you also can’t go to M31 (2 million light years away) in 2016 starting from Earth in 2015. Most of spacetime is actually locked off from your experience. (And actually, there is nothing so far as we know that prevents a structure very like your physical body from traveling “backwards” in time without moving in space – all we would need to do is construct an exact duplicate of you, only with charge and parity of each particle exactly reversed, some time in 1995, and set it on a trajectory that results in you and it meeting and mutually annihilating in 2015. So far as the physics is concerned, we may interpret this as your reversing direction in time in 2015, and then traveling back to 1995, where something extremely weird happens to you in our laboratory. What happens to your awareness during this experiment – whether you “feel” like one person traveling forward to 2015, then back to 1995, or whether there is a “you” and an “anti-you” that each feel like he is traveling forward in time, to 2015 where you meet and destroy each other, we don’t know.)
You do have this peculiar property, however, which we can’t as yet explain: at each time point in your existence, you have a keen awareness of what happens at earlier times – but almost none at all of what happens at future times. Hence you believe, very strongly, that the past is fixed and the future mutable. On the surface, this is bizarre. Consider the simplest of physical phenomena – a particle in inertial motion. Is its future any less predictable than its past? Of course not. If we add a few more particles, the same is still true, although the math gets impossible fast. (Nor does this conclusion change with quantum mechanics, although the math gets impossible almost instantly.) If we go all the way to very large (near infinite, thermodynamic) systems, at equilibrium, the future is also as predictable as the past. There *are * some very special systems, which at one extreme have very low entropy and at the other very high entropy, and for these systems it is indeed much harder to predict the future than the past, at least mathematically speaking. We think you and indeed the entire universe are such a system, but we don’t really know why, it’s a major unsolved problem.
Nevertheless, we don’t really understand why you have good insight into events lying at time separations in the direction of decreasing entropy of the universe, and terrible insight into events lying at time separations in the direction of increasing entropy – which is what gives you the impression that you are traveling “forward” in time. Perhaps it has something to do with the fact that the math is simpler in the “reverse” direction – after all, your brain is just a giant computer, and if it can “solve” the equations that “predict” events at some time separation from you, it stands to reason it could solve them easier for events in the “past” than in the “future.” Maybe that’s enough to give you the illusion that the past “happened” and the future “hasn’t happened.”
So from this point of view, there is no death per se, there’s just a finite temporal extent, and this weird fact that at each point along it, you stand looking only towards the past. Hence the “you” of 2015 believes it is “older” than the “you” of 1995, because it is aware of more (what happens to you between 1995 and 2015) and the “you” in the last moment of your life is unique in that it remembers the greatest possible extent of what happens to you – there is no other “you” that can logically feel older, and since you believe you continually transform into older you, there is nothing into which the oldest you can transform. (To make matters more gruesome, there * is * something into which the rest of us believe you can transform “after” that point – which is a rotting body and eventually dust, and our reports to you of observing this with other people make you believe that this unaware volitionless contemptable decaying material is indeed that to which your oldest self transforms, which is deeply sad.)
Unfortunately, the purely intellectual argument that you have always existed, and always will, regardless of your personal illusion that you are an evanescent epiphenomenon traveling just once down a line, does absolutely nothing to assuage the fear of death, which is wired into us at the most fundamental level. We are imprisoned by the limitations of our perceptions, just as can’t imagine quantum tunneling or entanglement, or what 11 dimensions are like – or something less exotic, like what it’s like to be someone else – even if intellectually we know those things exist.
Bwahahahahahahaha!!!
How many of these threads (wherein it is revealed that many/most of us are going to ‘Answer is B’) are we going to have?
Maybe, just maybe, we’re actually in Hell NOW, and these threads are our eternal punishment.
Naaah - couldn’t happen.
Right? Right? - please say “Right”!
E: Heaven
…but, to hell with the angels and harps. When I get to town, it’s gonna be nothin’ but hookers and blow…for eternity, baby.