Public Universities Don't Want Science Students To Believe In God

public universities should never advocate any religious belief system. and like it or not evolution has a legitimate place in science classrooms. religion does not.

a reply to: saint4God

Thanks, I have updated my post.

I don't have a whole lot to add to the discussion beyond what's already been said.
My thoughts on faith are to allow anyone to have any imagination they want.
Who am I to tell them what to think or feel, as long as it doesn't interfere with governmental or scientific decisions, with real consequences.

You can't have for instance...

"My name is Bob, I have this feeling we can put at least 5 gallons of that chlorine into the water supply."
It just feels RIGHT to Bob.

Now Bob's a good guy, we barbecue with him on Sundays, but I wouldn't want him mixing my tap water, if you know what I mean.

I Steve the science dude, who knows toxicity levels, ppm, etc, etc...

Aside from that, religion and faith is helpful, IF you balance it with faith in yourself imo.

Sounds like they were trying to be edgy and create controversy, they didn't have a star rating system there, did they?

a reply to: Woodcarver

Only because a graduate assistant brought it up the first lecture by saying "evolution is the indisputable truth. It's been proven a million times. If you argue about that in my class I'll kick you out" or something to that tune.

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: saint4God

No one has the right to say "one cannot be both a scientist, and a Christian". What an outrageous notion. Some of the most well known faces in the history of higher reasoning were proponents of one or another faith, as well as being capable of observing the physical reality of the universe. These are far from mutually exclusive positions...what rotten nonsense!

Certainly not impossible. I'm sure we have all heard of dyslexic poets, claustrophobic closet organizers, and vegan butchers. But wouldn't you say there's an irony to be noted as well? Two scientists are supposed to look at data and come to the same conclusion. That's why peer review is important. So how do you explain a Jewish biochemist, hindu astrophysicist and atheist engineer/programmer all looking at the data and coming to three distinctly different conclusions regarding the nature of our place in the cosmos and where those cosmos came from?

originally posted by: TzarChasm

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: saint4God

No one has the right to say "one cannot be both a scientist, and a Christian". What an outrageous notion. Some of the most well known faces in the history of higher reasoning were proponents of one or another faith, as well as being capable of observing the physical reality of the universe. These are far from mutually exclusive positions...what rotten nonsense!

Certainly not impossible. I'm sure we have all heard of dyslexic poets, claustrophobic closet organizers, and vegan butchers. But wouldn't you say there's an irony to be noted as well? Two scientists are supposed to look at data and come to the same conclusion. That's why peer review is important. So how do you explain a Jewish biochemist, hindu astrophysicist and atheist engineer/programmer all looking at the data and coming to three distinctly different conclusions regarding the nature of our place in the cosmos and where those cosmos came from?

cognitive dissonance, only logical conclusion

a reply to: GetHyped

woo woo website

I think they're just taking the mick.

Here's a quote from another featured article on the site:

Scientists were performing a routine search for fifth-dimensional activity using the Large Hadron Collider, the immense particle accelerator famous for proving the existence of the Higgs Boson, when they came across the entire corpus of Western classical music from 9th-century plainchant to Nico Muhly.

The poor old OP has been bamboozled.

originally posted by: Woodcarver

originally posted by: JBDTheBeast
I for one used to be an atheist when I was younger but as I matured I began to realize the naivete of such an idea. Contrary to what most consider the norm I formed my Religious beliefs through logic not faith. The more I think of how absolutely perfect and balanced this universe is the more I see the hand of "the creator". For instance if you were god and you wanted to put uniquely created souls through a sort of test of free will, then how else could you do so without this EXACT system we find ourselves in.

Your awe of the universe is why you believe in god? Which god do you believe in?

What does your god want from you?

Are there people who disagree with you?

If god simply appears to people differently and he wants something different from everybody, why does it seem like he is pitting everyone against everyone else?

I don't think of God as a person but as an intelligent embodiment of the laws of the universe. If you ponder absolute nothingness for long enough and ask yourself "why not nothingness?" You will understand that something had to WILL it into existence.

originally posted by: Woodcarver
Name one thing you believe in that cannot be observed.

I believe the instrument printout of the data sheet that tells me how much Primidone is in this solution on my desk. I cannot see it and other than this data (which can be wrong at times), I have no proof.

originally posted by: Woodcarver
Wait wait.... How did faith save your life and your marriage?

I always love to hear these "i was a horrible person until i found god" stories.

I didn't think I was a horrible person, but I was skeptical. It is a long story that probably puts people to sleep, but in summary, I didn't believe in anything that couldn't be seen. I was willing to prove that nothing existed beyond life by killing myself, because if nothing did, then there's no real point to living out 80 years or so anyway. I challenged anything that existed beyond the human realm to show itself, then I would believe. That was a stupid move, I wouldn't recommend anyone go this route. The good news is, because I asked for God's help before there were no choices left to make, I was rescued.

Over a decade later regarding my marriage, my spouse felt trapped career-wise, was unsure what she wanted as far as our relationship, stressed with being a new mother and didn't see any hope for a future (overwhelmed in debt, almost lost the house but didn't tell me a lot of things going on in order to spare me). Despite a prescription overdose that in all likelyhood would've taken out other people, she was permitted to survive and found a new direction as a believer. There was much praying at that time from myself and others while she was in the hospital, which may or may not have made a difference, but this was the single most important thing I'd ever asked for and believe I was gifted it. All has been good since but they are times never to be forgotten and grateful for surviving.

originally posted by: Woodcarver
Einstien was not religious and he did not believe in any gods. He was using the language that he thought would reach people who shunned science in favor of religion. Just like Michio does when he speaks about knowing god's mind.

I've heard debate on Einstein and am unsure myself what he believes God is...but that's understandable, many people are still debating what Jesus meant by "God" (even though to me it's clear). Michio is still around though, it would be nice to get some clarification as to what he means. I hope someone will, I'd like to listen.

originally posted by: avgguy
a reply to: Woodcarver

Only because a graduate assistant brought it up the first lecture by saying "evolution is the indisputable truth. It's been proven a million times. If you argue about that in my class I'll kick you out" or something to that tune.

As a graduate assistant. He would be well within his rights to remove someone who is being a disturbance to the class and the lessons he was teaching.

originally posted by: saint4God

originally posted by: Woodcarver
Name one thing you believe in that cannot be observed.

I believe the instrument printout of the data sheet that tells me how much Primidone is in this solution on my desk. I cannot see it and other than this data (which can be wrong at times), I have no proof.

originally posted by: Woodcarver
Wait wait.... How did faith save your life and your marriage?

I always love to hear these "i was a horrible person until i found god" stories.

I didn't think I was a horrible person, but I was skeptical. It is a long story that probably puts people to sleep, but in summary, I didn't believe in anything that couldn't be seen. I was willing to prove that nothing existed beyond life by killing myself, because if nothing did, then there's no real point to living out 80 years or so anyway. I challenged anything that existed beyond the human realm to show itself, then I would believe. That was a stupid move, I wouldn't recommend anyone go this route. The good news is, because I asked for God's help before there were no choices left to make, I was rescued.

Over a decade later regarding my marriage, my spouse felt trapped career-wise, was unsure what she wanted as far as our relationship, stressed with being a new mother and didn't see any hope for a future (overwhelmed in debt, almost lost the house but didn't tell me a lot of things going on in order to spare me). Despite a prescription overdose that in all likelyhood would've taken out other people, she was permitted to survive and found a new direction as a believer. There was much praying at that time from myself and others while she was in the hospital, which may or may not have made a difference, but this was the single most important thing I'd ever asked for and believe I was gifted it. All has been good since but they are times never to be forgotten and grateful for surviving.

Were there any doctors involved with you or your wife not being dead? I'm sure you had a vision or something too? God spoke to you as the doctors were saving your life? Couldn't have been a hallucination from the drugs you took enough of to kill yourself? And then remorse, nothing brings out the jesus in folks like remorse for almost killing yourself. I see you didn't give credit to jesus for putting you in a place where you felt like killing yourself. That was all you right? Or maybe the devil for tempting you?

Thank you folks.

So you make a # pile of your life, almost kill yourself because of guilt or whatever, and now you're preaching jesus and salvation. You think that believing in this fairey tale should put you in a position of a teacher? One who is spreading the good word? Sorry pal, i saw you coming a mile away.

originally posted by: Woodcarver
Why did god even come up around these professors?

This is a excellent question and I had to ask myself this one too, especially after the class ended. "What just happened?" I can say in all situations, I was not the one to bring God up. I did wear a cross or pro-Christian shirt now and then, but don't think that counts although I'd been accosted a time or two for doing so. Although in World Religions, it was obvious why it was brought up, my question to the professor is why he decided to rope science into it as well. On the flip-side, there's a few required textbooks (like Diversity of Life by Stephen Gould) which go on the offensive. I figured, alright, I'll step up here and defend what I know or put on my skeptic hat and challenge what's being said. When I mentioned that trans-species evolution lacked data and a replicable mechanism to qualify the hypothesis according to the Scientific Theory (which they taught at the beginning of the course), I got the heckle, "how do you explain it, God made everything? You need SOMETHING to explain it that has some kind of scientific foundation". When I began discussing how atomic composition in creation has scientific validity, all of the sudden I was a religious nut.

originally posted by: Woodcarver
Were you trying to inject god into everything until it annoyed the pisss out of them, so that they would lash out and you could feel persecuted?

I don't have the goal of pissing people off by bringing up God, that wouldn't really help them have a favourable opinion of Him, would it? I can say however, when I suggest the idea of His advocacy, people do get really pissed off or annoyed. That's when I put my hands up and apologize, "sorry, was not intended." What is interesting to hear though is the story as to why they respond that way. Most of the time, there was some sort of trauma in the past to cause the negative opinion. As far as being persecuted, I know that I'm not. I've never been threatened to be killed for my beliefs, though many in other countries cannot say the same.

It just seems that atheist professors wouldn't bring it up unless someone else did.

It was the soup of the day in World Religions, for the others, it was either another student asking about Creationism, the professor, or something of the like. I don't like confrontation, but not afraid of it either.

originally posted by: saint4God

originally posted by: Woodcarver
Name one thing you believe in that cannot be observed.

I believe the instrument printout of the data sheet that tells me how much Primidone is in this solution on my desk. I cannot see it and other than this data (which can be wrong at times), I have no proof.

originally posted by: Woodcarver
Wait wait.... How did faith save your life and your marriage?

I always love to hear these "i was a horrible person until i found god" stories.

I didn't think I was a horrible person, but I was skeptical. It is a long story that probably puts people to sleep, but in summary, I didn't believe in anything that couldn't be seen. I was willing to prove that nothing existed beyond life by killing myself, because if nothing did, then there's no real point to living out 80 years or so anyway. I challenged anything that existed beyond the human realm to show itself, then I would believe. That was a stupid move, I wouldn't recommend anyone go this route. The good news is, because I asked for God's help before there were no choices left to make, I was rescued.

Over a decade later regarding my marriage, my spouse felt trapped career-wise, was unsure what she wanted as far as our relationship, stressed with being a new mother and didn't see any hope for a future (overwhelmed in debt, almost lost the house but didn't tell me a lot of things going on in order to spare me). Despite a prescription overdose that in all likelyhood would've taken out other people, she was permitted to survive and found a new direction as a believer. There was much praying at that time from myself and others while she was in the hospital, which may or may not have made a difference, but this was the single most important thing I'd ever asked for and believe I was gifted it. All has been good since but they are times never to be forgotten and grateful for surviving.

So you think it is faith which leads you to believe the contents of that bottle? And not the fact that it is a calculated measurement? You know it might be wrong, but you also know how to calculate the contents for yourself, and you understand that someone else has already done those calculations. If there is a reasonable chance that the contents were not accurate, and this inaccuracy would put off the results for which it was intended, would you still take it on faith that it was correct? Or would you check it yourself?

originally posted by: saint4God

originally posted by: Woodcarver
Why did god even come up around these professors?

This is a excellent question and I had to ask myself this one too, especially after the class ended. "What just happened?" I can say in all situations, I was not the one to bring God up. I did wear a cross or pro-Christian shirt now and then, but don't think that counts although I'd been accosted a time or two for doing so. Although in World Religions, it was obvious why it was brought up, my question to the professor is why he decided to rope science into it as well. On the flip-side, there's a few required textbooks (like Diversity of Life by Stephen Gould) which go on the offensive. I figured, alright, I'll step up here and defend what I know or put on my skeptic hat and challenge what's being said. When I mentioned that trans-species evolution lacked data and a replicable mechanism to qualify the hypothesis according to the Scientific Theory (which they taught at the beginning of the course), I got the heckle, "how do you explain it, God made everything? You need SOMETHING to explain it that has some kind of scientific foundation". When I began discussing how atomic composition in creation has scientific validity, all of the sudden I was a religious nut.

originally posted by: Woodcarver
Were you trying to inject god into everything until it annoyed the pisss out of them, so that they would lash out and you could feel persecuted?

I don't have the goal of pissing people off by bringing up God, that wouldn't really help them have a favourable opinion of Him, would it? I can say however, when I suggest the idea of His advocacy, people do get really pissed off or annoyed. That's when I put my hands up and apologize, "sorry, was not intended." What is interesting to hear though is the story as to why they respond that way. Most of the time, there was some sort of trauma in the past to cause the negative opinion. As far as being persecuted, I know that I'm not. I've never been threatened to be killed for my beliefs, though many in other countries cannot say the same.

It just seems that atheist professors wouldn't bring it up unless someone else did.

It was the soup of the day in World Religions, for the others, it was either another student asking about Creationism, the professor, or something of the like. I don't like confrontation, but not afraid of it either.

You stepped up to defend what you know? You mean that jesus and god are real and that science makes mistakes so jesus makes more sense?

You do realise that science has been on the defensive for thousands of years because of religious powers killing anyone who disagrees with it? Yes, we are most definately annoyed at the constant interjection of this creeping ideology that has no foundation in reality. It is annoying. All we ask for is proof and all you have are opinions and stories of seeing god as they are slipping away from life? Religion doesn't solve any problems that can't be solved with rational thinking.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
OP: Your title makes a claim that "Public Universities" don't want students to believe in gods.

The only evidence you offer is your experience with four of your professors."

It is my evidence, but I soon learned that my experiences were not unique. When talking to other biochemists, most of them said essentially, "I just kept my faith to myself. I was there to get the degree to get the job I wanted and move on." If I were to be considered a unique case, it would be for speaking up rather than following the herd.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Anecdotal evidence at that.

I'd given the name of the school and persons involved, so it's verifiable, but was asked to remove it out of courtesy or privacy concern. This is more than a legend that grandfather heard and used to tell kids. I understand the need for trivialization in a debate, but don't believe it applies in this case.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
As a scientist, do you find yourself believing things for which there is no evidence aside from one individual's testimony?

Often, but if there's reasonable doubt, it needs checking out. I'm told the dark side of the moon is cold.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
If not, I believe you might need to ask for your title to be more accurately worded ... something like ...

"A few of my college professors didn't approve of my religion."

Because that's all that's being offered here. That makes your title look like deliberate click-bait, and borders on a hoax.

I never needed the approval of my religion from my professors. What do they have to say about whether or not I have eternal life? Makes their head nodding look very small. It certainly is not a hoax (may the mods ban if so). At best one could say I am the only person in the world who has ever experienced this, although it's demonstratively not true. All you have to do is ask a Christian who is a scientist from a public university if they've experienced anti-God teaching in their education. If they say yes, I'm sure there's at least one example they can share. As far as click-bait, I don't see any awards for points, so I guess we could say that would be pointless.

originally posted by: saint4God
Although I couldn't say one way or another if theoretical physicist Dr. Kaku's details (as I don't understand them myself) are definitive proof of God

Absolute horsepucky!
Kaku is an ENTERTAINER and a crackpot! Obviously you are unaware of his 'work', like writing a word on the outside of a container of water and claiming that it alters the structure of the water when frozen? Writing 'Love" makes it all pretty, and "hate" makes it ugly!!
He is completely without credence, at least no more than J.Z. Knight channeling Ramtha!

Anyone claiming definitive 'proof' of God is delusional, an idiot, both, or a fraud!
And definitely Faithless!

'Science' is not troubled by 'belief in God', it is the insanity, and the intellectual debility symptomatic of any 'belief infection'!
One symptom of a 'belief infection' is the steady degrading of cognitive and intellectual function, leading to insanity!
If your 'science' is NOT in the area of your belief infection, it can be 'fairly performed', but the mind is still 'ill and dysfunctional', and grows with the severity of the infection.
It is not 'God' that is the problem, but the intellectual dysfunction symptomatic of 'beliefs'!

originally posted by: Woodcarver
a reply to: TrueBrit

Nobody except christians make the claim that people say that you cannot be a scientist and a christian. But how does one's faith help to make discoveries? Which scientific discoveries were made because of one's faith in a deity?

It is my opinion that science and faith are irreconcilable.

Why, since when did you convert?

originally posted by: saint4God

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: saint4God

No one has the right to say "one cannot be both a scientist, and a Christian". What an outrageous notion. Some of the most well known faces in the history of higher reasoning were proponents of one or another faith, as well as being capable of observing the physical reality of the universe. These are far from mutually exclusive positions...what rotten nonsense!

Thank you for the support and wish I had heard this when I was a student. It would've been a comfort to know I wasn't the oddball in the outfield.

You are not. My husband has dual degrees in biology and microbiology and works for a fairly well known pharmaceutical firm. He is in the same position you are.

originally posted by: Woodcarver
To me, this is one of the biggest red flags. Along with all of the impossibleness in the bible, and all of the other religious books.

Scientists tend not to believe in supernatural events. Especially chemists and physicists.

I've met those who believe in ghosts out of experience, but aren't religious or spiritual. Not sure why scientists get painted with such a broad brush, we're quite an appreciatively diverse group.

originally posted by: Woodcarver
If put to the test, i'm sure i can convince any one that supernatural is a misnomer. Once something is discovered, it is understood as having always been part of the natural world, and simply undiscovered.

Understandable and agreeable.

But for something to be truly supernatural, it cannot ever be discovered, because it will by definition, not be able to interact with anything physical. Which puts the whole premise of a supernatural god to rest. You would then need to redefine god as a natural entity, which puts limitations on it's abilities. The same universal limitations we have to deal with. The christian god claims to have made us in his image, which clearly makes it a natural entity in the stories. Which makes it impossible for it to be a creator of universes.

From my perspective, God created nature, so I suppose there's nothing that is unnatural, just unexplained. To the things that seem supernatural to us, I don't think they follow these 'cannot' or 'must' rules as we have to, which is what makes them supernatural to us. They're the exception rather than obedient to our definitions.

Many people (Christians included) debate what "in His image" means and I'll admit I don't fully comprehend what that means. To me, we demonstrate some of the characters God does. We have the ability to love, we get angry, we're compassionate, protective, like to create, sometimes must destroy, et cetera. Does he have a physical body? Probably not so much, or at least not in the way we understand it because of the physical limitations you've mentioned. Maybe we have some sort of potential we're not able to unlock in this lifetime? The Bible would lean towards this being the case with immortality and freedom from suffering being two of them.

This and a thousand other contradictions in 1 of a thousand ancient religions. The stories don't make sense because they were written by uneducated people thousands of years ago.

Today's mathematics are based on learning over 5,000 years old. Some of which we're just now rediscovering or beginning to understand. Even ancient Greek math boggles my mind sometimes on how they were able to figure it all out given the few tools and written histories. We like to call ancient people dumb, but then again, in ten to twenty years our kids will know everything and tell us how we know nothing.

Fear of death and ostricization over these thousands of years, has led us to a point in our culture that people are still scared to let go of this fear based faith that is passed down from parents and peers, and not some far off deity.

I'm sure there are fear based people and not exclusive to religion. I'm sure there are plenty of people who cling to science as their security blanket because they're afraid of being out of control by not knowing and being forced to rely solely on faith. It's a human condition that doesn't seem to be a contingent on a religious variable. A hammer can be used to build a house or to destroy one.

a reply to: saint4God

I believe Science and "God" are very closely related. The real God, what Jesus preached as "God", not what wanna-be christians view as the god today.

"God" is more of a Creative Force. I think, and Jesus probably didn't have access to this verbiage when he was alive, a better word for God is "Universe".

He used "God" bc that is what an entity bigger than yourself was known as, there were many gods though, I believe he was trying to describe something where there is no earthly word to describe, even now.