Re: “Among the base assumptions of science is methodological naturalism.”
But, does science, to be science, have to be methodological naturalism? If so, does that mean Newton was not really a scientist?
I understand what you are saying in regard to morality and possibly the origin of the universe, but again, does believing in God disqualify a person from being a “scientist”?
If one believes that God created the universe, and created the original species of plant, animal, and insects, and human beings, as well as the various laws that seem to govern its physics - is that person incapable of being “scientific”? Does that make them incapable of doing scientific research?
The supernatural cause is not falsifiable so it doesn’t lend itself to scientific examination. That’s not to say that the scientist can’t be religious, historically most have been, particularly seeing how modern atheists treat it as though it is a religion and violate the separation of science and morality.