For my research paper, the first topic that piqued my interest, in the blog post, has to do with what the public can do to help prevent climate change and if climate change is real. To make the climate change topic less general I want to focus on meat consumption to answer the question; Can the public prevent climate change? Another topic I had in mind was how does social media affect adolescents to participate in political events or want to be more politically active? Another topic I had in mind was conservative feminism, and if it is possible to be both conservative and a feminist. I would have biases for all the topics listed because I don’t eat meat and I’m a feminist adolescent who believes that climate change is real. For example when Gerard states, “ I didn’t know a thing about the Civil War when I started. I hope my sense of discovery comes across when the reader discovers it”, is what I imagine I’ll be going through because although I am aware of certain topics, I haven’t dived into them enough to know an exact answer. Similarly, Bittner dives into his research without knowing what his ideal outcome will be and enjoys bird watching rather than analyzing through scientific investigation. I also have strong opinions about conservative ideologies and how conservative representatives in no way shape or form support feminist values. To prevent myself from assuming outcomes or answers to my topic, I would research multiple viewpoints and perspectives. In order to make my paper different, I must choose multiple sources to research and analyze different perspectives that go along with my topic.