There are credentialed scientists that believe in crop circles. There are credentialed scientists that believe in UFOs. There are credentialed scientists that faithfully read their horoscopes. That doesn't make any of these things established science.
They are a minority to be sure.
I doubt it. I think there are probably a majority who, either because of unexplained anomolies, or the repeated success of the principle that there's nothing special about our little corner of the universe, entertain some form of ID, or panspermic notion.
Unlike creationists and other scientific cranks, however, scientists do not have any trouble differentiating these fancies from serious science.
You know if you are right that the majority of scientists entertain some form of I.D., then maybe it's because they are seeing evidence that leads them to conclude that. And maybe they do us a disservice by not discussing that evidence. No doubt it's probably hard to quantify.
But if you don't discuss it, it will never be quantifiable.
When I do a financial analysis or acquisition study, I lay out the numbers in a very scientific manner. But then I go back and discuss things that I see as strategic issues that can influence those numbers. And sometimes those strategic issues are simply not quantifiable. Nevertheless they are important, sometimes a lot more important than anything I can quantify.