Try to stay on point. I can tell that you like to pontificate, but none of what you have said in this essay or the one above, has anything to do with the main points of the argument. BYU does not perform a significant level of research, in the eyes of those who make the choices about who to add to their athletic conference. Therefore BYU will not be a member of the PAC.

About private sector funding research: The private sector is very good at funding research in areas that have immediate profit potential and I agree that they are much better at it than the government is. But what about research that has no clear profitability? In your model that research doesn't get done. The recent finding of the Higgs Boson would never have happened, the US would have never set foot on the moon, we would have robots crawling on Mars. None of this is profitable and therefore wouldn't happen under your model. You may be OK with that but I and most of the rest of the developed world think those are worthwhile pursuits.

Regarding climate change: I stand by my claim that 99.9% of published, peer reviewed in respected scientific journals say that this change in climate is due to human activity. I won't address your points because you didn't address mine. Show me one valid journal article saying that the change in climate is not due to human activity and I will give you 99 that say it is. Quite honestly I didn't read your whole essay it might have a valid argument, but I doubt it.

Now lets get back on point. BYU in my opinion is a fine university that I would not have a problem if my two children chose to attend, I am personally hoping for one of the Ivy League schools but it is up to them, but it is not a research institution. It doesn't have $100's of million dollars in private grants, like you you said, it does about a quarter of the research of the University of Oregon. Being a research institution is a stated requirement for membership in the PAC, so it should not be a surprise that it was passed over. Combine that with the perception that academic freedom is impinged gives a probable insurmountable hurdle. It has little to nothing to do with religious bigotry.