Fallacies:
1. “the low-density type of development that has been expanding rapidly encourages forest fragmentation”-non sequitor. I should include evidence that supports this statement
2. “seasonal maintenance of common areas could reduce the transmittance of Lyme disease”- non sequitor. I need evidence t support this statement

Poster: There are a lot of graphs and maps available for my poster, and I would include pictures as well. I would heavily rely on visuals, since they are they easiest way to get my point across

Putting together this presentation helped me to narrow my topic and define it better. I found that it finalized my ideas. When someone asked me what I was researching, I was able to explain in a couple of sentances. Also, doing research for a background report of my topic introduced me to many resources and studies on my topic. The question afterwards reminded me that I need to look closely at my sources and where they are getting their information from

Brian, Allan F. “Effect of Forest Fragmentation on Lyme Disease Risk.” Conservation Biology 17.1 (2003). Wiley Online Library. Wiley, 11 Feb. 2003. Web. 09 Oct. 2010.

Fisher, James. “Investigating the Role of White-footed Mice in the Transmission of Lyme Disease on Fire Island, New York.” Thesis. State University of New York, 2010. SUNY-ESF, SUNY College of Environmental Science and Forestry. SUNY-ESF. Web. 09 Oct. 2010.

Glass, Gregory E. “Environmental Risk Factors for Lyme Disease Identified with Geographic Information Systems.” American Journal of Public Health 85.7 (1995): 944-50. Digital Programs and Systems [Gateway]. Proquest. Web. 09 Oct. 2010.

“Mid-Atlantic RESAC Forest Change in Northern Virginia 1937-1998.” Department of Geography, University of Maryland Home Page. University of Maryland. Web. 09 Oct. 2010.

“Mid-Atlantic RESAC Forest Change in Northern Virginia 1937-1998.” Department of Geography, University of Maryland Home Page. University of Maryland. Web. 09 Oct. 2010.

 Olson, Sarah H. “Understanding Regional Patterns of Vector-borne Infectious Disease in a Changing Environment.” Diss. University of Wisconsin, 2010. Digital Programs and Systems [Gateway]. Proquest. Web. 09 Oct. 2010.

I think that the most useful citation will be the first one, “Effect of Forest Fragmentation on Lyme Disease Risk,” This citation will be helpful because it quantitatively explains the relationship between the changes in the environment that we are seeing in the DC area, and how that affects the rate of Lyme disease infection. Although this study took place in Connecticut, the fragmentation pattern described in the article are similar to those found in DC. Also, the other articles explain development or the spread of bacteria, but this one ties the two together, which is what I am trying to do.

I think that Stallybrass means that all knowledge builds on itself. I think he means that our thoughts should be compilations of what we have learned from other people, or taking what we have learned from others and thinking about it in a new way. Also, he points out good ideas don’t spontaneously appear in our heads, they are formed from actively researching a topic. One can spend hours thinking in circles, but come to no conclusions if they don’t have a base to work off of and a process to go about it. I think he means that in order to have a “new idea” one has to organize bits and pieces of many peoples knowledge in a clear way

3 questions I have about my research:

What vectors does the bacteria travel by?

What species are most affected?

What management practices can lower deer ticks and their hosts?

I am interested in reasearching how to control the spread of Lyme’s disease. I am interested in this because two of my horses have Lyme’s disease and it is spreading rapidly throughout the U.S. This issue is important because Lym’es disease affects millions of people and animals, and new research shows that it can harbor in the body, and in some cases never truly be cured. This means that new emphasis needs to be put on prevention.

In class on Thursday, we talked about in situ versus in context exhibits. The Enola Gay exhibit would be an in context exhibit because it is presented with mostly words to explain it. In regards to the issue of the “official story” that is being presented, I feel that it should be up to the museum to display the information that it wants. In the Japanese news article, it is said that the Air and Space Museum wants to be mainly a technological museum. This would imply that the focus of the exhibit would be on the technological advancements needed to facilitate the transport of this new type of weapon. While the tales from Hiroshima are heartbreaking and relevant from a historical standpoint, they are not relevant from a scientific standpoint. If the museum were to stay focused on its scientific aspect, then the “official story”  would not be nearly as controversial, since the context could explain things like how the atom bomb works and they did the technical parts of the bombing. The atom bomb and the Enola Gay both have a fascinating back story that can be told without insult to bomb victims or war veterans  when it is told with a focus on scientfic advancement

During FDR’s presidency, he concealed many things about his paralysis. He was careful to never be photographed with a wheelchair. He choreographed his public appearances so that the press would not be able to photograph him getting in or out of a car. While making a public appearance, he was always supported by an aide or his lecturn. If FDR made an official story that he was not entirely crippled. By doing this, he projected an image of strength and resilience, rather then weakness. This stronger official story would make the public have more faith in their leader, whereas the truth may have caused people to doubt him.

From Frederick Douglass’s letter to Henry Clay in 1847, we learn that he was actively involved in determining whether or not the newly acquired territories from the Mexican-American war would be slave holding or not. Frederick Douglass was extremely angered by Henry Clay’s inconsistencies regarding the issue. Douglass uses quotes from Clay’s speeches to point out his hypocracy. I think this shows us that the decade before the civil war was a time when the abolitionist movement was taking off, and more into the minds of mainstream voters. Abolitionism became a value of the Republican Party of the time, and so Republican politicians supported it in their speeches. However, as Frederick Douglass points out, they were less willing to do so in practice. This must have been insulting to people such as Frederick Douglass, who probably felt that Clay was just using his cause as a way to get votes. Furthermore, Douglass shows discomfort with the fact that Clay thinks that states and the new territories shoud choose wether or not they have slaves, showing that Clay will not commit to being a true abolitionist.

This letter raises questions about the suitability of slaves in an expanding America, and the hypocrisy of some Republican politicians. Given the desert climate of much the Mexican cessasion, not suitable for plantation agriculture, would slavery even have been feasable there? Also, how would politicians who thought that blacks were just as capable of whites, such as Jefferson and Clay, refute claims of hypocrisy such as this one from Douglass?