"A large random cross section of the population is surveyed for their views."

Surely "large" is subjective and 1 in 7000+ doesn't seem that large.

Also, how do you allow for the likely disinclination of those who are entirely uninterested to bother answering, given that the vast majority of those would be the non religious, of whose lack numbers YOU are so damn certain?

Your record is one of latching on to the opinions of "authorities" of widely variable qualification and building their opinions into an argument which you then defend to destruction. When it is destroyed you claim it was their opinion, not yours.

Why should anybody give credence to your utterances?