Don't you dare put the anti-evolution creationists in the same league as those actual scientists. There's nothing wrong with believing in "God and creation". There is, however, everything wrong with using that belief as an excuse to reject with a hand-wave any and all science which you choose not to accept just because you incorrectly believe it might clash with your religion. The men you mention were never ignorant enough to make that mistake -- they followed the evidence wherever it led, firm in the conviction that whatever they found, it was revealing the workings of God's creation. The same can not be said of the modern anti-evolutionists, who desperately argue against even the most strongly validated and well-established scientific findings, which they barely understand (or thoroughly misunderstand), out of a misguided sense that it is somehow "blasphemy" against their narrow notions of what God might be or how His universe works or how He brought it to be.
Those who reject science out of fear, ignorance, and these flimsiest of personal biases aren't fit to shine the shoes of the great scientists who believe in God which you list. They sought truth, in the most intellectually honest way possible. They looked at Creation itself to learn how it worked. The anti-evolutionists, on the other hand, actively avoid looking at the real-world evidence, so as to better maintain their cherished preconceptions, unsullied by facts, unchallenged by reality.
