Coming from a Master of the Art, you should know.
But your real mastery is at the art of Changing The Subject. I, Betty, Alamo-Girl, and a host of others have repeatedly put you on notice that the target of our disagreement is with the scientists who defy the clearly stated and commonly accepted scientific canon that Science is competent to deal only with material fact, and cannot be used to deny the existence of the Judeo-Christian Tradition, including God’s creation. We have named many highly accomplished scientists such as Richard Dawkins, Steven Weinberg, Daniel Dennett, William B. Provine, Steven Pinker, Stephen J. Gould, Peter Sanger, Michael Tooley, Richard Lewontin, Carl Sagan (now deceased), Marc Hauser, and Victor Stenger, as well as thousands of their less well-known colleagues and various other camp-followers (Liberals), who use Science as the instrument to declare that God (any deity) does not exist and that religion is therefore useless. You continue to deny that any such exist despite the fact that they are now so widespread and public that they have become a part of the public domain.
Your level of denial is truly astonishing.
You've named 12, past and present.
And you characterize this as "many" of how scientists have there ever been, past and present?
Yes, I'm trying to quantify it, because that's how you find it that "many" is really significant, or is just a miniscule fraction of what's actually being considered.
And I'll submit that any proposition needs to be subjected to that kind of scrutiny. There's nothing wrong with asking that question, and it needs to be done more often.