"...if you take elite scientists—if you look at the National Academy of Sciences or the Royal Society—the proportion of believers drops to almost zero."

– Richard Dawkins

“If you look at the elite community of scientists in the United States—the National Academy of Sciences—you find that roughly 93% of its members do not believe in a personal God. These are the people who are actually doing the heavy lifting of science."

– Sam Harris

All aboard the groupthink bandwagon express! Membership of the RS and NAS is the result of increasingly antitheist gatekeeping, not scientific literacy – they vote eachother into these positions and then claim to represent science. Scientific truth is not a matter of democracy, let alone one based on such a tiny electorate. How scientific is it for a committee to elect itself as the arbiter of theological truth? Does a lie become truth if spoken by such an arbiter? In any case, it is utterly absurd to suggest these institutions are at the forefront of science in the presence of the applied scientists at DARPA/Northrop/Lockheed whose metric for success is demonstrability – actual scientific application rather than theological bias, but for obvious reasons we cannot get demographic analyses of their scientists, but they are known to be selected from a far wider, more religious location pool rather than antitheist academic circles. We can also look at data compiled from civilian medical practitioners, instead of confining the definition of “scientist” to someone appointed by a committee:-

“76% of doctors believe in God” - https://www.uchicagomedicine.org/forefront/news/survey-shows-that-physicians-are-more-religious-than-expected

Why would an opinion coming from echo chambers like the NAS and RS matter more than actual practitioners of science who are qualified by objective, demonstrable wisdom? I could say this is evidence that God exists, but I am not an advocate of bandwagon fallacy, unlike antitheists.

One obstacle antitheists come up against in the antitheist quest to label Christianity as “unscientific” is the fact that many great scientists are, and were in the past, overtly Christian. Isaac Newton, Louis Pastuer, Robert Boyle and Francis Bacon. While antitheists rely on speculation, assumptions and confirmation bias self identifying as “science”, Christian scientists like Bacon and Boyle pioneered the scientific method specifically because they did not believe speculation was sufficient. Their theologies drove them to demonstrate, contradicting antitheist claims of these efforts being “in spite” of faith. Watching men like Dawkins trying to use science in antitheist debates, I don’t see an enlightened man educating his audience, I see a petulant child biting the intellectual hand that feeds him.