I see you mention Rene Descartes. He believed in the existence of souls, and, taking that hypothesis seriously, he concluded there has to be a way for the soul to send signals to the body. He went looking for an organ that might fulfil this purpose, and concluded that it is the pineal gland.
This conclusion is false, the true function of the pineal gland is known today, but it illustrates a point : the old theistic scientists tended to take religion seriously, they viewed it as a valid scientific hypothesis whose implications in the real world could be stud...
Note the lack of recent names.
Also, Spinoza's God is identical with everything that exists-- it isn't much like the God in most (any?) religions.
This year's receiver of the Carl Sagan Award was a Jesuit Brother. I find it very funny, although I don't know if I should.
From what I understand .there are a lot of established and respectable scientists who are theists. Anyone could go on a treasure hunt for more, but it doesn't prove anything. It's just a numbers game.
Choosing people who lived more than 70 years ago is a bad choice for the argument that you want to make. People in the past being wrong is no good reason for taking people who believe in religion today seriously.
This means that the article is pretty low quality and has no place on LW.
In addition to being low quality it's a violation of copyright and as such should be deleted.
I'd like to see some scientists from other religions. And see what I found:
Wikipedia on Science and Religion and especially the part on Buddhism and Science but apparently buddhist scientsis are hard to come by.
Of interest: Don Page: a prominent cosmologist and an Evangelical Christian.
(I posted this link as a separate Discussion post earlier, but then changed my mind.)
I would rather wish to read in an article named like this (or something like this - 'famous' might not be the most useful trait to select for, even though it helps cross-check ring) is 'what do scientists believe in that can be stuffed into 'religion' that has guided their actions/ (moral) arguments in definable ways'. As in, did vaccine developers believe in God and if yes, how did they reconcile the ability to prevent illness with God's will? If they themselves had never seen a problem with prevention, surely they were pointed it out? Was there ever any non-trivial discource of such questions that referred to faith?