The claim that science was really created by religion is, to me, quite misleading. To be sure some of the details are murky. But the macro effect of WHEE makes it clear that science emerges in an independent stream from more primitive, but still scientific sources, there being a clear overlap with philosophy, far more than religion. We can put the issue to the test: we see the first ‘scientific revolution’ clearly emerging in the later phase of the Greek Archaic, with some juicy hybrids like Heraclitus. The attempt to declare that modern science really started in the middle ages is not really true. The sudden eruption of the second scientific revolution in the sixteenth/seventeenth century was not an outcome of medieval seeding. http://history-and-evolution.com/whee4th/chap7_5_4.htm
The clear outcomes along the lines of scientism make it clear that the religious impulse was long gone, if never present, in the emergence of science.