This document discusses the relationship between certain societal groups and the scientific community. It notes that some fields like climate change and evolution have become politically charged, causing stakeholders to either unquestioningly accept or be extremely skeptical of scientific findings depending on their ideological views. This has created tensions between scientists and skeptical public groups. Scientists are sometimes accused of letting politics influence their work, while skeptical groups are dismissed as irrational. The document asks students to describe their societal groups' relationship with science - identifying any tensions or distrust, and their impacts. Students are instructed to post a 250+ word response and reply to two other posts with 50+ word comments.

1. **Due By Saturday April 23, 2022 no later then 5pm
**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
something factual from a scientific perspective therefore there is questioning that science

2. 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.