In my estimation, all atheist philosophers who try to reconcile religion and science are doing so for political reasons—as are organizations like the National Academy of Sciences and the National Center for Science Education that engage in the same activity. It takes a profound hypocrisy to try to reconcile for others things that you can’t reconcile for yourself.Don't think so! It's true that most philosophers (70%) are atheists, and that almost all accept science as an important source of knowledge. But if you reject theism and accept science, it certainly doesn't follow that you reject theism because you accept science. You might reject theism for reasons completely independent of the reasons you have for accepting science. In fact, I think that's the state of mind of many philosophers. Many reject theism because of the argument from evil. Or they reject theism because none of the usual arguments for God are successful, and they think the default, when it comes to a fanciful construct, is disbelief. So although they accept no religious propositions themselves, it's genuinely an open question, for them, whether you could accept some, and yet accept all of science.
There's nothing at all unusual about philosophers wondering if A can be reconciled with B, but also rejecting A. Theist philosophers can reasonably wonder whether atheism and objective morality can be reconciled, but of course reject atheism. That's a first class question for anyone who "does" metaethics--not a question just for those who accept the atheist starting point. If there were a "political" aspect to the question, for theists, that wouldn't be bad either. Perhaps, though a theist, it bothers you to see your atheist friends being beaten up as morality-challenged. So you care about and promote the idea that atheism can be reconciled with objective morality, even though the reconciliation plays no role in your own life. Hypocrisy? No, obviously not.
Is it any different when atheists try to stop their theist friends being beaten up as science-challenged? Of course, if the effort is disingenuous, that's one thing. Maybe you think your theist friends are science-challenged, and you're just trying to be nice. But if not, not. I think what some atheist philosophers believe is that a little bit of religion (certainly not all of it) can be combined with all of science, and that's what they insist upon--not more. That's not hypocritical or disingenuous. In fact, it might even be the truth.