Yay for New Zealand. http://richarddawkins.net/articles/5242 (I found it indirectly; I only visit that particular trash-heap infrequently. I say trash-heap not, so much, because of the ego-centric main man as due to his followers).
Read the comments and see how pathetic the worship of the New Atheist Heroes is.
If you're one of these fanboys/girls, please: wake up.
If you doubt the signatories are real scientists, here's an example: http://www.cup.canterbury.ac.nz/catalogue/NZ_Inventory.shtml
There are a number of distinguished others I am aware of or know myself; the group signing this is it would appear a fairly ad hoc one, assembled in response to Dawkins. Those who think there are only 11 or so genuine scientists who are Christians in New Zealand are ignorant; there is no better word.
On another vaguely related note, I note an irony: the inventor of the "no true Scotsman" fallacy, (the late) Anthony Flew, in his later years seems to have been despised as not a true philosopher for having given up his atheism for a kind of Deism. I am reminded of this possibility by the ad hominem attacks by loser internet nobodies on these highly-qualified NZ academics who think the New Atheists are jerks (yeah sure, maybe there was a little irony in that sentence).
On 'another another' note, perhaps it's my English that is deficient, but I find this humorous:
Dr David Hardman, principal lecturer in learning development at London Metropolitan University, said:
It is very difficult to conduct true experiments that would explicate a causal relationship between IQ and religious belief. Nonetheless, there is evidence from other domains that higher levels of intelligence are associated with a greater ability – or perhaps willingness – to question and overturn strongly felt institutions. (http://freethinker.co.uk/features/atheists-are-more-intelligent-than-religious-people/) [can you, even in the cultural sense [e.g. marriage], strongly feel an institution?]