Ignorant Atheists?

[Edwardo Piet]

On atheist.net I posted about if religious scientists can be "true" scientists. At first maybe (like on this thread) I came across as going a bit too far. But in the end I think I got across what I believe. Here in this post of mine on atheist.net, replying to a member called GordonHide (I'm called 'Improbable' on Atheist.net):

Originally Posted by GordonHide
Well I've never read Dawkins' book but I'm certain he doesn't say that religious scientists were worse scientists because of their religion.

I (as Improbable) reply with:

Nor am I saying that. I'm just saying that today, in 2008 the greatest scientists are more likely to be atheists. Especially if you consider that there are less atheist people altogether than theist people, scientist or not. And yet the greatest scientists of today are still often atheists.
And in 2008 the important scientific God Hypothesis is a question that the most intelligent scientists should know the scientific answer to. Because they're scientists. Rather than thinking they're separate. Thats very unscientific for a scientist in this day and age. Whether they are otherwise great scientists or not. The question of God's existence is one of the most important scientific questions to ask. So to get that wrong in this day and age downgrades them I think.
I mean if there was [a] brilliant scientist in many ways but he/she didn't believe in evolution or even thought the world was flat, what would you think then?
Science isn't about usefulness. That's invention. It isn't about what Dawkins would call 'non-stick frying pan science', its about answering scientific questions. And the question of God's existence is a very important scientific question indeed.