I suppose I was referring to scientists who view the universe in a purely mechanistic way driven ony by chance and without purpose. Certainly that is promoted as the rational scientific approach in contrast to religious fantasizing. I mean promoted in popular culture and by some scientists as well.
Agreed.
My own view is that God set the Universe in motion according to certain Laws, which hold at all levels and in every instance, astronomical and subatomic. What we call "chance" is only our limited ability as humans to adequately model and understand the near-infinity of precursor events that play into and affect every subsequent event.
And I see no reason why God could not have set up Laws that include an element of indefiniteness. I disagree with Einstein on that one.
Popular culture is the antithesis of scientific rigor, and the "popularizers" who endeavor to enlighten the public a little about science generally end up weakening the science to the point where it's laughable and embarrassing to those of us who take it seriously.
Scientific method and religious study are not opposites on a linear spectrum, nor are they orthogonal. They're different paths to similar goals. Those (of either camp) who deny that, simply haven't taken a step back to view the larger scope of human striving for enlightenment.