A lot of hurt feels in the replies in the comments proposing that the large numbers hypothesis is evidence (it's not, it's just an astrobiology version of the gambler's fallacy.)
Other replies say "belief is totally fine for a scientist"
Ok. So let's ask those same thousand scientists whether they believe in astrology and watch their body language change.
Nearly all of them refuse, crucially, they refuse correctly.
They don't say "I believe astrology is false."
They say "astrology was tested, and it ate dirt." When Shawn Carlson's 1985 Nature double-blind trial ran real astrologers through a controlled experiment, they performed as well as the cosmic equivalent of a Mercury Dime flip. Do you really wan to go there?