This is truly the concern of our time.
I’m going to be honest, this just looks utterly useless for any country that isn’t south africa, and ESPECIALLY useless for any country in the northern hemisphere.
Like, yes, sure, you’ve made all the country’s areas roughly equal, but also every single country that isn’t south africa is a distorted, warped mess that looks nothing like its actual shape.
Look at parts of europe- every country is a COMPLETELY USELESS shape. Three quarters of them have been turned into diagonal lines. How the fuck is that useful? Europe is the worst area in that regard, but by no means the only one.
It makes it literally useless as a map.
Every country looks distorted and warped based on your lifetime of experience looking at mercator projection. Every country looks warped and distorted when compared to globes. We learn geography on a flat surface which is inherently distorted because we live on a round surface
Actually, fun fact, the entire point of the Mercator projection is that it DOES maintain shapes/angles, just not scale. It’s a nautical map, it’s for sailing. That’s why when you look at a mercator map and a globe, the countries look about the same, just potentially different sizes- because that’s literally the point of it.
Who actually uses it as a map though? It’s usually only seen briefly in apps, or in various symbols, or on a classroom wall. As a symbol, having the rights sizes would be a significant improvement. In an app, people will zoom in anyway, so at least they’d passively see the correct proportions when zooming out, instead of getting a false impression. In a classroom, it would seem all that more importantly to not give false impressions to kids.
The problem with that is that it gives a completely incorrect idea of what an individual country looks like, in a way that gives a false impression to kids about what the countries even look like. Suddenly they have to look at one map, and recognize a country, and then look at a zoomed in, more accurate map, and recognize it in a completely different shape. To be frank, most people’s geography knowledge is already bad enough- doubling the amount of shapes they need to learn is basically a non-starter.
For classroom instruction, a globe should be being used anyway- that’s the gold standard. Why go through all the work and effort of introducing a worse solution, that doubles the amount of studying, and is made completely useless when it can be replaced by a $10 globe?
Is learning the shapes of countries really all that important? I would have thought by the time the shape matters, you’re looking at/learning the details of the country, at which point you’re not looking at a map of the entire world anymore anyway.
Yes? The shapes of countries- and their relation to other countries around them- is literally the most important part of learning geography in some respects, because of how much that shape is influenced by- and has been influenced by- the surroundings, the socioeconomic and sociopolitical history, etc etc.
We should encourage the use of more globes to represent world maps.
Like, seriously. Almost all maps are viewed on a computer screen, all computers easily have the ability to display a sphere and rotate it
Kinda hard to fit a globe inside a school book, or any book
It’s kinda easy to have globes in school though. Doesn’t need one per student.
can’t hang a globe on the wall
Just use a string and two thumbtacks, it’s not rocket surgery.
a globe?
String attach to globe, string attach to thumbtacks, globe now hanging.
The simple fact is no map projection will be perfect or do anyone “justice”.
You’re flattening out a sphere to a flat rectangle. A lot of compromises have to be made. So go with the one that functions best for navigation.
Some projections are better than others. The Mercator projection at least has a use case that justifies its creation. This map has no purpose other than a political one.
Everyone with a cursory knowledge of maps knows there are inherent issues protecting a 3d object into a 2d surface. That’s fine because some projections are useful
Well a rectangle gives you easy direction, true north is always up. But you can map very accurate maps that are not rectangle. They just make navigation a bitch
Globes.
Gerrymappering.
Me when someone calls my pp smol
I feel like it’s missing a style I don’t know the name of but can describe. Basically a map made up of 4-6 parts depending on it they want the north and south poles wherein it shows the earth at 4 different point roughly broken up by continents, Europe and Africa, Asia and parts of Oceania, Oceania, and North and South America.
Damn the Goode called me tf out
Dymaxion.
Waterman is nice and all, but I don’t like the way it splits Australia and New Zealand, or how it puts Antarctica in a separate bit like Alaska in USA maps.
Dymaxion offers a nice continuous view of all the continents, and can still be folded into a sufficiently spherical globe-like thingy.
It’d be nice to have an alternative version that made the oceans continuous, though, for people who like ships and stuff.
No credit for Mollweide projection ;(
Shoes with toes wtf
I’ve heard they’re very comfortable but they do look weird
As a Dvorak user, why not dymaxion
Dvorak users, assemble!
Robinson always looked the best to me
What brand are your running shoes?
“It’s [the Mercator projection] the world’s longest misinformation and disinformation campaign, and it just simply has to stop.”
No matter how we cut it though, all 2D projections will have some kind of distortion. They opted to preserve area, while the Mercator preserves angles. Arguably it is less important today to preserve angles, as we have automatic navigation systems. There are some alternatives that also preserve the area: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/76/The-Equal-Earth-compared-to-similar-equal-area-pseudocylindrical-projections.png
Right. What people need to understand that any globe put on a flat surface will be distorted. Their proposal is just as distorted as the Mercator, just in area vs angles as you stated.
Its a good thing you came along to reiterate that.
Just fyi this 2D projection is also distorted just in angles instead of area.
It’s not a damn campaign. Activists never seem to be good at nuance.
The Mercator is a propaganda campaign to make Christian countries look big and powerful. Ask yourself why is it only “Christian” countries that are distorted.
Edit: should have put this /s
Maps were used for navigation, which meant angles needed to be preserved. Christian nations colonised a lot, meaning they needed to have maps for navigation a lot too.
This isn’t some weird propaganda campaign, that makes no sense. Try making an angle-preserving map that doesn’t wildly distort the north and south of the world.
Besides, not sure how Christian the icy wastes of Greenland and Antarctica are.
The Mercator projection is good in what it was made for: Navigation. You know. The whole purpose of maps.
When was the last time you used a global map for navigation?
It’s not even terribly good for that, as when traveling at global scales, most of us travel along great circle paths that end up looking wrong on the Mercator protection.
Navigation isn’t the only purpose of maps. You can display geographical, social, economic, and a whole host of other datasets on to maps. And since maps with fidelity to lat/long lines are no longer a requirement for navigation, there’s a good argument for accurately displaying relative positioning and size.
I know right! It’s all done to further Antarctica’s hegemony! Just look how huge it seems!
/uj If you want no distortions, get a globe.
But what about Latin America and Christians parts of Africa
Those are inferior skin colors so they’re excluded.
I added to the original comment but I’m trolling lol
Reminds me of the West Wing episode with the Petersen (?) projection map. Although I seem to remember that map format was under copyright and would have required a fee for every use. An intended consequence?
That’s why I use the dymaxian projection
Gall-Peters 4EVA!
I really like the Dymaxion projection.
I prefer to unfold a map to read it, as opposed to doing origami just to figure out where I’m going.
Me too! Also the Waterman Butterfly.
Cool! Didn’t know that one, thanks!
Ok come up with something that’s better and just as practical.
They did. They are specifically advocating for the Equal Earth projection.
I mean everything is approximately to scale i guess, but the further east or west you get from Europe/Africa the more bent things get. Including the area that 75% of the worlds population live.
Well yeah, every map projection has to mis-represent something. In this case they’re arguing that presenting area is more important than presenting angles. Outside of long-distance travel on ships and planes, which are not using general-purpose world maps, nobody is navigating with a world map, so I think that they’re probably right here. It seems more important to me to understand the relative size of Africa to other landmasses than it is to know that the Korean peninsula is actually a few degrees off of being straight north of Borneo
Like completely, or just as a default?
It’s uniquely the best option if you like using compass bearings.
Which, at a global scale, is important in your life when exactly? The only time I move at a global scale I’m flying, and then the projection makes it look like my pilot doesn’t know how to fly in a straight line.
Since the advent of widespread GPS, a lot less. It’s historically interesting, and is still used as a backup by some ships, but it’s not really necessary the way it was in the age of sail when it became the projection.
Again, if they just want to switch to something more balanced as a default when you just want to point at things on a map, that’s entirely reasonable.
Or just want a map that you can cut a small piece (up to a square 10° of longitude) from and have it just work (no skewing or non-proportional scaling required) although non-interactive world maps should use Robinson, Winkel-Tripel or something.
Of course, “a square 10° of latitude”, while the same size on the full map, will cover different areas. The side length is approximately:
- 1110 km near the equator (0°)
- 960 km in North/South Africa or Florida (30°)
- 790 km in NYC, Venice or south NZ (45°)
- 558 km in Oslo, Anchorage or northernmost Antarctic islands (60°)
- 289 km in central Greenland, northernmost peninsula of Russia or Canada or southernmost sea (75°)
- at higher latitudes, approx. 𝑥 km when 6𝑥 km from the pole
If you’re at the Amundsen-Scott research station, a square 10° of latitude won’t do, as it covers just about your bed.
It was very much a real discussion back then as well. The writers didn’t invent this argument.
People have been complaining about maps in general since we first started making them. The Gall-Peters projection that they mentioned traces its origins back to 1855 when James Gall first introduced the concept.
In the 1970’s, Arno Peters made this projection well known. He specifically argued the point the show makes: other maps distort our perception of the world and it fosters problems with how we treat some countries.
Beat me to it. Except it’s more like 25 years. Now get off my lawn.
Such a beautiful scene.
“But you can’t do that!”
“Why not?”
“Because you’re freaking me out!”
I think equal area maps make a lot of sense, but the one I’ve seen promoted in the past as “fair” is the Peters Projection which is quite frankly trash.
It was designed to preserve angles at the equator, and as a consequence all the shapes at higher latitudes are badly squished in the vertical.
If there has to be distortion to preserve areas, it should squish in both dimensions and try to optimize shapes around the middle latitudes.
