The motions which the planets now have,..could not spring from any natural cause alone, but were impressed by an intelligent Agent.

Non-credible scientist, notorious for spreading his "theories" about planetary motion.

Isn't this what led to the Argument From Authority Fallacy? Scientist need to stay in their lane, and expect blowback when they don't. Newton's belief in alchemy doesn't tarnish his development of calculus.

Don't look into why we use the Latin word for ghost to describe light then

I get where this meme is coming from, but I think it's a bad idea to remove a person's credibility if they believe in a thing that I consider supernatural/bullshit/pseudoscience/charlatanesque.

Firstly: a supernatural phenomenon today could be a scientific field tomorrow. Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.

Secondly: They could simply be ill-informed about the state of knowledge about that subject, or they had a very bizarre experience that they don't know how to explain otherwise, or they never thought too much about it.

They do lose credibility to me when I present facts and arguments as to why I believe it to be false, and they fail to show they can have a rational debate to explain why they think I should change my mind or understand that they could be in the wrong and acknowledge it.

I don’t believe in things that are considered “supernatural”. However, I don’t think that someone believing in something supernatural disqualifies them from doing good science, the same as someone who has a purely materialist belief system isn’t necessarily qualified to do good science. The clincher for me is that they can do their best to operate science without biasing it.

For example, It’s perfectly possible for someone who believes in string theory to study it as long as they are using the true scientific method, the same as it’s possible for someone who does not believe in string theory to study it with proper scientific method. If you project that same example towards something more controversial, like telepathy, it’s still a valid understanding of how scientific study should work.

50 people so far that should be banned from this sub

I don’t tell people I’m an atheist, I am, instead I tell them “I don’t believe in magical thinking” that way religion is covered and all this other stupid bullshit along with it

Because Einstein's science had absolutely no basis in fact.

You could jump to conclusions, or you could ask whether or not there is evidence that scientists' work in their own field is affected by irrelevant unscientific beliefs that they hold. In my experience, people are very good at compartmentalizing their beliefs.

?