Do I Buy It? Hmm...

No, I don't buy Menzie's argument that the Chinese were in the North America first.  Throughout the video, I was convinced that all his evidence was vague enough for him twist it to fit his theory.  I understand that he is trying to prove a point but most of this evidence seemed like they were mere assumptions that can't really be proven wrong.  He blatantly says what he thinks without really proving it.  The information before his statements act like they're supposed to prove his point, but they don't really.  Like when he was talking about a merchant, he said that the merchant had to be DiConti and all the information before it alludes to it.  However, there is no proof that the merchant was DiConti.  I also don't believe the maps he was using to find the islands.  They are probably really old and unreliable and those drawings may not be entirely accurate.  It seems like mere coincidence that the map drawing and the present-day drawings look similar.  I also don't believe what is submerged in the water.  I can't see what it is in the video and I don't know what it is.  And I am convinced that Menzie probably has no idea either, except he hopes it can help his theory. I guess I mostly don't buy his argument because he seems  a little bit desperate to prove his theory. 

Buddies!

I would think that Tahiti and Hawaii had good political, social, and cultural relations.  The two way voyaging signifies these relations between the two islands.  The people of Hawaii were not opposed to Mo'ikeha marrying two of their princesses.  If there were political and social issues then he would not have been accepted and the marriage wouldn't have happened.  Their cultures were probably similar because there weren't any problems with the marriage mentioned.  The Hawaiians also respected Mo'ikeha's other wives and didn't have some uproar about it.  To be honest, if I was one of the princesses, I'd probably be pretty mad but that seems to be culturally accepted in Tahiti and Hawaii. The Hawaiians also accepted one of the Tahitians' gods when Mo'ikeha's son came. Hawaii also seems more open-minded because it easily took Tahiti's hula dancing and drumming.  Overall, Hawaii and Tahiti seem like they would (metaphorically) sit at the same lunch table because they seemed to have good relations with each other. 

High School Girls and Europeans & Muslims

Based on high school girls, I think that the Europeans can't have a positive view of the Muslims.  This problem between the Christians and the Muslims reminds me of two girls I know.  These two girls are pretty similar but hate each other for no reason.  They fight, spread rumors, and treat each other poorly.  They don't really have a reason to hate on each other.  Both of these girls are super stubborn and it's nearly impossible to change their minds. The same is seen in the Europeans' and Muslims' disagreement except it's more extreme.  While reading the Christian documents, I was convinced that the Christians were just as close-minded as the girls mentioned before.  They have their strong beliefs that prevent them from seeing the Muslims' perspective.  They also have their own opinions and rumors that they view as facts, like Muhammad being a son of Satan.  These rumors could be destroyed if the Christians learned about Islam.  But the Christians don't seem willing to learn about Islam, all they seem to want is to get rid of it so Christianity can be dominant. The Christians also don't seem to like the Muslims because of how they were treated.  Since they were treated poorly, they feel insulted.  Most people when they're treated poorly or insulted hate whoever was hurting them.  They treat that person in the same way.  All of those accounts convince me that the Christians won't ever have a positive view ion Muslims because they don't want to communicate between each other and they've had enough bad experiences that they don't want to change their minds.  Both groups as a result probably don't want to change their minds either because then they have to admit that they were wrong.  They might have to question their religion and themselves and no one wants to do that. Overall, I think the Christian perspective readings support that the Europeans won't have a positive perspective on Muslims.  

Trip to the Cape of Good Hope..

So..I'm not an artist..but at least I know that maritime trade can't happen in a desert..

The person who made that made and I need a trip to the Cape of Good Hope considering we're hopeless beings.  

Gerald the Griot

I'm pretty sure that if I were to learn history from a griot I'd remember more of it.  When I watch interesting movies, tv shows, musicals or any other performance, I can usually recall those memories more easily.  So if I were to learn from a griot, especially one name Gerald, I would probably remember more history because I was entertained.  But at one point I would get bored and I would probably dismiss him just as I do with the textbook. Then he wouldn't be able to teach me and it would be useless.  Also, I would want the griot's name to be Gerald because in one of my favorite Nicktoons, Hey Arnold, Gerald told stories and I made a connection today.  

Visualization!!

I think the ideal shape of history's progress really wouldn't be much of a shape that can be described.  I think a time line would be useful for the broad picture.  It helps me mentally think of the progression of how history happened and it keeps me from being confused.  But then there would have to be little charts or boxes hovering around in those time periods.  The time line would have overlaps but it would distinctively show where each region started and ended a new era.  I said there would be little boxes in each time period for each region.  The little boxes would be color-coded for each region and they would contain the major events, significant information, and thematic topics(for this class specifically.)  The shape would probably be some weird line with lots of rectangles stuck to it.
Since this probably makes no sense, there will possibly be a picture below this, that is, if I can get technology to stop hating me. 

When Will My Reflection...I Don't Know All the Words but I'll Reflect Now..

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AmAUibsLT-vRdDRKQUN1dmNOLTFfYVI5X0wyV01TWXc#gid=0


I noticed that my essays are terrible when I don't have a good thesis and when I don't answer the question. (This makes perfect sense.) For compare and contrasts, I've also noticed that I can remember to analyze and make direct comparisons but never do either together.  For change over time, I think the most difficult is remembering both parts and the global context.  I think for both, I can get some evidence to support my thesis.  Also for both, I just give up on expanded core.  For compare and contrast, I attempt to include global context for the extra points but I don't really bother for change over time essays.