Tom Stoppard is my absolute favorite playwright. He is a wordsmith unlike anyone else. He wrote a play called the hard problem analyzing the very thing you question. I was fortunate enough to hear him speak with a physicist he spoke with in length to get to core of this hard 'problem'. The play only scratches the surface of an answer. When i walked in to the theatre i was starstruck at this man who changed the person i am. (I am better because his words encouraged mine) And i watched this man sit googly eyed over the words of a physicist. He was starstruck - so cute! By association, the physicist had credibility. I was taking in lal his words. But it wasn't his words that causedmore questions to spin. I thought surely my stoppard is an atheist, right?? Negative. I walked out of that disussion questioning the depth of his spiritually. Somewhere in the discussion, there was a statistic around 35% of scientists (in a closed study) subscribed to an atheist belief system. Another 40% to agnosticism. Thats terribly low (in my opinion). I think your post (and forgive me if i got this wrong) ... I think your post is asking if the numbers seem right. If the world is clearly science vs. faith, then one needs to pick a side. But, its not as simple as that. It seems to be a hard problem.

there are no legitimate religionists in the science fields. there are certainly people who follow a religion. they keep it to themselves and don't try to skew scientific findings to support their religions, as a religionist would.

g

The more people do science the better. As long as they can separate the science and their personal belief I don't see how it would make any difference. So yeah, stay fabulous