The arrogantly anti-theist bent of recent posts to this thread are quite unfortunate. I particularly take issue with the following:
external, independently unverified polls, with unknown demographic factors and unknown questions, have expressed an overruling of both science consensus and WP-local consensus.
Why is WP consensus not US general consensus? As people become more educated and involved in NPOV-based projects, the move toward rationality. NPOV requires at least a rational basis for article craftsmanship, which implies rationality in other areas.
IIRC, the typical MBTI for WPdians is quite different from the average majority. WP by default is represented by bookish, eristic types. PR crusades by any particular irrational POV, regardless of its representaion, is bound to fail, simply because belief=irrationality, hence not NPOV.
That is exactly the sort of fact-dismissing POV pushing I have always combatted by use of books of reference, and basic logic. There is a reason why state-education fosters atheism, and it has nothing to do with facts or logic. In the US, according to a survey published in Nature in 1997, four out of 10 scientists believe in God. Just over 45% said they did not believe, and 14.5% described themselves as doubters or agnostics. This ratio of believers to non-believers had not changed in 80 years. The majority of academics however... I shudder to think.
Jack (Sam Spade)