Why are Most Scientists Skeptics?

Someone in an internet discussion forum asked why most scientists are physicalists.
A physicalist is someone who believes that all things can be explained in terms
known to physics such as matter and forces of nature. Physicalists do not believe
in psychic phenomena or the afterlife or that consciousness is not produced by the
brain. None of these things can be explained by modern physics. I replied to that
question with five reasons that most scientists are physicalists:
Habitual reductionist thinking prevents scientists from accepting anything that
they can't explain in terms of simpler phenomena, such as non-physical
consciousness, qualia, and psychic phenomena.
Indoctrination into philosophical naturalism during science education.
Psychological attachment to the status quo scientific world view because it is the
source of their status and livelihood.
Fear of alternative means of obtaining knowledge about the universe that might
supplant science as the most important source of knowledge. If you can ask a
psychic or a spirit, why would you need scientists?
Persecution of heretics. If Nobel prize winning physicist Brian Josephson is
ostracized because of his interest in psi, what chance does an ordinary scientist
have?
References:

Habitual reductionist thinking prevents scientists from accepting anything that

they can't explain in terms of simpler phenomena, such as non-physical
consciousness, qualia, and psychic phenomena.
Causes of skepticism
Research has shown that people who think analytically rather than intuitively tend
to be atheists. People who analyze problems using logic, because of their
education, career, or innate characteristics, may become habituated to reductionist
analysis. Reductionism is the belief that something complex can be understood by
the interaction of simpler components. This way of thinking works well in many
branches of science. Psychology can be explained in terms of biology, which can be
explained in terms of chemistry, which can be explained in terms of physics.
However, some scientists, engineers, philosophers, and other intellectuals, may
become so habituated to reductionist thinking that they are unable to conceive that
some phenomena cannot be explained in terms of simpler phenomena. For example, the
subjective experience of consciousness, what pain feels like, or what red looks
like, cannot be understood through reductionism. Psychic phenomena that cannot be
explained by current scientific theories such as telepathy, clairvoyance,
psychokinesis, and precognition cannot be understood through reductionism. This is
why some people who are habituated to reductionist thinking simply cannot conceive
that psychic phenomena could be real or consciousness might be nonphysical and
survive bodily death. Reductionists suggest consciousness is an epiphenomenon even
though that is a poor explanation of consciousness, because it is the best they can
conceive of within their reductionist prison.
Indoctrination into philosophical naturalism during science education.
T. H. Huxley: Accidental Founder of Modern Pseudo-skepticism
Why are so many scientist skeptics? Because naturalism is an implicit part of the
culture of science and science students are indoctrinated in that philosophy during
their education. Naturalism is the belief that science should only study natural
processes and consider natural explanations for phenomena. This is a mistake.
Science should be the search for the truth where ever it leads. This flaw in the
culture of science is due to a large extent to T. H. Huxley and the X club. The X
Club was founded by T. H. Huxley and played an important role in making naturalism
a fundamental tenet of modern science.
Psychological attachment to the status quo scientific world view because it is the
source of their status and livelihood.
Suppressed Parapsychology
Dean Radin, in his book "The Conscious Universe" in the chapter "Seeing Psi"
proposes that some scientists may have too much self interest in preserving the
materialist status quo to be objective about psychic phenomena.
...
It should be understood that Radin is not saying NAS members are deliberately
dishonest about the existence of psychic phenomena. He is saying they are so caught
up in the scientific world view, (for example, because they get a lot of personal
status from it, or because they spend their careers defining that world view) that
they are unconsciously unable to accept that the scientific world view might be so
seriously flawed, that it could have such big gaps in it, that psychic phenomena
could be real.
Fear of alternative means of obtaining knowledge about the universe that might
supplant science as the most important source of knowledge. If you can ask a
psychic or a spirit, why would you need scientists?
Causes of skepticism
Genuine psychic phenomena have been produced by ordinary people throughout the
history of humankind. However, these phenomena were rejected by science for
"political" reasons, not empirical reasons, when the scientific revolution deposed
religion as the ultimate source of knowledge. Besides being seen as allied with
religion, psychic phenomena are a competitor to science as a means of obtaining
information about the universe. Therefore, some modern scientists have a lot of
cultural baggage that prevent them from seeing the otherwise obvious evidence that
some paranormal phenomena are real.
Persecution of heretics. If Nobel prize winning physicist Brian Josephson is
ostracized for interest in psi, what chance does an ordinary scientist have?
How to Run a Conference
Certain invitees to a workshop on the Foundations of Physics received from the
organisers letters withdrawing their invitations. The letter to Brian Josephson
asserted:
It has come to my attention that one of your principal research interests is the
paranormal ... in my view, it would not be appropriate for someone with such
research interests to attend a scientific conference.
while a similar letter to David Peat asserted:
"It has come to my attention that you are the author of books on Jungian
synchronicity and quantum physics, and on connections between Native American
Indian thought and modern physics ... in my view, it is not appropriate for an
author of such books to attend a scientific conference."
These letters illustrate well the defensive, paranoid attitudes of members of the
scientific community such as those who pressed for this action to be taken; for
such people, science equates to 'closed minded enquiry', in the light of which
their action is in no way surprising.