On the one hand, certain scientific fields like climate change and evolution have become politically polarized, with supporters and skeptics adopting extreme views based on their ideological perspectives. This has created tensions between elements of the scientific community and societal groups. Some scientists are accused of allowing politics to influence their work, while skeptical publics are dismissed as irrational. It is difficult to make progress in this culture of suspicion and defensiveness. The author asks students to consider the relationship between their own societal groups and the scientific community, identifying any divisions or distrust and their impacts.

1. [From 10$/Pg] 5Pm Pacific Usa Time
[From 10$/Pg] 5Pm Pacific Usa Time**Due By Saturday April 23, 2022 no later then 5pm
Pacific USA time**No plagiarizingOver the past several years, some important fields of
scientific study (e.g., climate change, evolution) have become entangled with ideological
agendas. Unfortunately, when scientific findings have political or religious
implications, stakeholders tend to react emotionally, displaying either unquestioning
acceptance or extreme skepticism, depending on their own ideological perspective. This
creates a wedge between elements of the scientific community and certain societal
groups. On the one hand, scientists are accused of allowing their political viewpoints to
affect the way they analyze, interpret, and report their findings. And consistent reports of
data tampering and academic dishonesty only add fuel to this fire. On the other
hand, skeptical members of the public are dismissed as being irrational, unintelligent, or
foolish. In such a culture of suspicion and defensiveness, it is difficult to make progress.For
this week’s discussion board, think about the societal groups to which you
belong (e.g., political, religious, ethnic). How would you describe your group’s relationship
with the scientific community? Is there any “bad blood” between your group and some part
of the scientific community? Explain. What areas of division or distrust can you
identify? What is the impact of these divisions?This post should be no less than 250
words. ****Next, respond to the posts of TWO other students BELOW in no less than 50
words each**—>>>>Respond to Kristin 50 words minimumThe relationship that my group
has with the scientific community can be a mixture of emotions. Christians tend to be seen
from scientists as having untrustworthy ideas of the beliefs from the Bible and not being
statistically proven. Both aspects of religion and science have a compelling number of
differences because of personal belief that can come between the two. I would have to say
that there is plenty of “bad blood” between Christians and some part of the scientific
community. When it comes to the “bad blood” between the two groups, I find it more to be
on personal influences that contribute to the division and not so much as proof from one
aspect or the other. There is great deal of debate of who is right when it comes to the beliefs
but there is not a saying that one supersedes the over the other.The biggest one that comes
to mind within this division is how the world was created. Christians follow the teaching in
the Bible that all things were created by God. On the other hand, scientists would say that
the world was created by evolution over time. The back and forth of this belief creates many
disagreements between the two because typically science proves things from a biological
standpoint. The bible does not have the “data” that science typically likes to see to prove

2. something factual from a scientific perspective therefore there is questioning that science
always has on Christian beliefs. The beliefs of Christians and information derived from the
Bible of God’s creation should not be taken away from those who have religious beliefs.
There is adequate amount of coexistence between the two that can go hand in hand to avoid
the division and in turn embrace the knowledge from both aspects to make informal
conclusions.—->>>> Respond to Raylene 50 word minimumI would describe my group’s
relationship with the scientific community as not a close relationship because my societal
group is religious. My societal group believes that God is the reason for our creation and the
theory of evolution is not something that brings them skepticism because they trust God
and his word. However, I can’t necessarily say the same about myself. I do consider myself
religious, but I am skeptical about human creation. It is difficult for me to choose one side,
but I also don’t feel as though I need to choose one side. There isn’t necessarily bad blood
between my group and the scientific community, but one thing that I do see in my church
community is that they have no regard for science. They don’t even question science, which
I disagree with because I believe science is very important in understanding the world
around us. I don’t think religion is the reason for all life, but I do believe that both faith and
science worked together to create humankind. The areas of division and distrust I can
identify is my religious community not trusting medicine as much as they trust their faith.
They believe that medicine might help heal those who are sick, but they also believe that
their prayers and God will be the sole person in creating a miracle. I think it is great that
they have trust in God, but I also believe that they should have faith in medicine as well.
Because science and faith can work together to create a miracle.