Scores of scientists are writing books about how God does not exist and that science prevails. Clearly a theme.
Is there a theme though? Are there "scores" of scientists writing books like that? You cherry picked a few books.
Go to a bookshop and look in the science section. Pretty much all the books are just talking about the science.
A few may have an anti-God agenda but I'd suggest it's a tiny minority of scientists. In fact, in your cherry picked examples 2 of those are by
the same author, Dawkins! That doesn't shout to me that there's a huge anti-God movement in science.
As for Aristotle, from your source:
Aristotle is highly critical of the anthropomorphizing of divinities, pervasive throughout Greek culture. He thinks not only that the stories told about the traditional gods are absurd, but that these gods do not exist
So he was certainly against the polytheistic religion of the day. As a Christian, so am I and, I assume, so are you.
Whether he was an atheist...maybe, but what of it?
As JSS said, there is no "head" of science who is pushing an anti-God agenda. Scientists are individuals who will have individual beliefs and many prominent scientists down the centuries have been Christians. The idea that science was started and continues to this day as a concerted effort to disprove God is nonsense, as is the notion that Christianity and Science are in opposition to one another and you have to "pick a side".
The only "philosophy" in science is to discern truth about the physical universe we find ourselves in. It has nothing to say about whether there is any purpose behind it. And, conversely, religion should concern itself with our purpose and what, if anything, happens after we shuffle off this mortal coil. It shouldn't have anything to say about, say, the shape of the earth.
Now find us a modern contemporary scientist held in high regard who claims:
"Creationism was right all along!"
or
"The world REALLY IS 6000 years old!"
or
"The Earth is the central body of the Universe!"
Support any of those positions and you are rejected from normal science discourse. You are deemed a quack scientist or whatever. They don't believe in the scriptures, or that they could be true.
They don't believe in
your interpretation of the scriptures. Nor do I. Nor do most of the people at your church, if you go to one. I don't know anyone at my church who believes most of those things. Probably there are more young earth Creationist Christians than flat earth ones. I believe them to be misguided in their interpretations. As I said earlier in the thread, some Christians when confronted with science which conflicts with their understanding of Scripture conclude that the science must be wrong. I would suggest they should consider that
their understanding may be wrong. As I said earlier, if you're going to take everything literal in the Bible then how are you believing that the earth is a circle (Isaiah 40:22) and a square (Isaiah 11:12). Circles famously don't have corners. You are literally trying to square a circle.
Many people believe that the scriptures are "true" without believing that everything in them has to be scientifically accurate. The Bible often uses poetic language to teach us deeper truths.
The things you mention are not rejected by scientists because of an inherent underlying philosophy which is anti-God or anti-Christian. If that were so why would there be any Christians who are scientists, which there demonstrably are. These things are rejected because the weight of scientific evidence is against them. There are many ways to tell we live on an old earth, and a globe.
If someone came along with compelling evidence that we do not then would they be rejected out of hand? It's hard to know because there is no compelling evidence other than "but my book says...". I believe that scientists are always open to amending their ideas if newer ones come along which demonstrably model the world better - Einstein's theories overturned centuries of Newtonian physics. But the start would have to be some proper, compelling evidence of a young or flat earth and thus far none has been presented.
You are creating a false dichotomy where you claim you either have to believe in Scripture or science. I'd suggest no such dichotomy exists. The only reason you think it does is because of your interpretation of Scripture, one which is not shared by most people with faith.
You do not need to "pick a side", but you might need to amend your understanding of Scripture in the light of modern (and no so modern, in some cases) science.