Could be quackery, but there is this.
That article brings up an important point… just because someone is an atheist doesn’t mean that they necessarily believe there isn’t a spiritual or higher realm, or even a creator.
i think you’re referring to an ‘agnostic’ someone and not an ‘atheist’?
Right - I think that most people would categorize me as “agnostic”. However, I actually think that atheism is a more accurate label. The reason is that while I believe that there might be a creator, and I admit that one of the existing religions may be correct, I think that by far the greatest likelihood is that there isn’t a “creator” in any sense that we can conjure. More likely, the realm in which we exist is far more complex, and even the notion of a “creator” is laughably primitive, and that we aren’t even asking the right questions (nor are we capable). I also think that our scientific method would be considered quaint by a more intelligent being, although I think that higher forms of “science” are far more likely to reveal answers than any spiritual method. In other words, I don’t KNOW if there is or isn’t a God, but I very much suspect that there isn’t.
I’ll also add my belief that science must necessarily always leave the door open a crack by admitting there is a remote possibility for things like prayer, God, etc., to be true, but it doesn’t follow that scientists are therefore agnostics by definition.