If this is so in the US--and I cannot say that it isn't so--then the situation is indeed different there. I do not doubt that in the UK the preponderance of scientists are of a conservative inclination, at least within the classic disciplines (chemisty, physics, biology) rather than the "social" sciences. I'll try and run down a source for my assertion here and post it--I'm sure polls of voting intention by career have been published, let me see what I can find
In the US among scientists that I know (and that's a fair number), I'd say the split as to Right/Left is about the same as the general population.
I pinged PH because he may have some hard numbers.
The post is totally unsubstantiated drivel.
That's probably the case in the US also. Science appeals to the conservative mind for the same reasons that free enterprise does. It's reality-based, it focuses on what works, it rejects failed concepts, and it produces results. Both science and free enterprise flourish where there is a minimum of governmental interference. There's nothing socialistic, communistic, fascistic, or atheistic about science; and there's nothing American about theocracy. American conservatism, which seeks to preserve and build on the wisdom of the Founders, is inherently rational at its intellectual base.
Having said that, however, I suspect that many scientists don't actually vote like conservatives, even if they are conservative by nature. It may be because so many Luddites tend to dominate the dialogue, which causes an understandable revulsion against any movement which appears to be so bone-headed.
But see also post 105. It doesn't have to be true for some to allege it and convince others.