"I would like to have the problems discussed in a classroom environment and debated in scientific communities. And I'd like to hear programs on television state: scientists theorize [or propose or suggest]; or it is thought [or conjectured.
But that's not what we hear and those with a dissenting opinion aren't even allowed in the cluhouse."
In scientific circles you talk about whatever you want to. When fellow physicists find out I am a Christian it often leads to a discussion of why and how.
When I explain it is because of a personal experience and that God has not left me with definitive scientific proof of his existence I've never had a hostile reaction.
In contrast, when I married to a liberal (15+ years ago) and I went with her to a couple of her Greenpeace meetings I got a severely hostile reaction for being a Christian and for daring to actually apply scientific knowledge to a discussion of nuclear power. In fac, they quickly banned me for life.
It sounds like we concur. I appreciated the definition of faith in Lee Strobel's book (the Case for Faith) paraphrased cuz I don't remember it exactly:
The RATIONAL RESPONSE to God's self-revelation in creation, scripture, the resurrection of His Son and in the changed lives of believers.
I believe we can look at his creation to see evidence of His existence. From a scientific standpoint, I believe that crediting chance and time for the complexity is preposterous. Einstein said something to the effect that he never ceased to be amazed by the God who revealed himself in the limitless details. How could such complexity come about by accident? It certainly merits discussion.
"In scientific circles you talk about whatever you want to."
Ooops - I meant to respond to your statement above - I am told that those with a differing point of view on evolution find it difficult to get good teaching or research positions, and find it next to impossible to get articles published in journals.