- cross-posted to:
- news@beehaw.org
- cross-posted to:
- news@beehaw.org
You must log in or # to comment.
“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.
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
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
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
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.
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.
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.
Not exactly it distorts shapes a lot. However if you pick point A on a coast and point B on a different coast the angle of the line is the heading you should sail to go from point A to point B.
So yeah very useful as a nautical map if you want to navigate from place to place. Not accurate in shape though.
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.
I really like the Dymaxion projection.
Me too! Also the Waterman Butterfly.
Cool! Didn’t know that one, thanks!
I prefer to unfold a map to read it, as opposed to doing origami just to figure out where I’m going.
Ok come up with something that’s better and just as practical.
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.
Such a beautiful scene.
“But you can’t do that!”
“Why not?”
“Because you’re freaking me out!”
Beat me to it. Except it’s more like 25 years. Now get off my lawn.
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.
I was honestly not aware. Learn something new every day!
You’re welcome, enjoy your odd new fact :D
Stuff like this is why I really enjoy The West Wing. It often has interesting real world arguments that it plays out smartly. A bit too optimistic in our current political climate, but still fun to watch.
This is truly the concern of our time.
Gerrymappering.
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?
Looking at the correct map makes it clear that our Risk Continent Troop values need updated now.
I love how big Ukraine is on the Risk map.
LOL I hadn’t seen that one.
16th century? Huh I would have expected a far more accurate version would have been made and accepted long ago.
Especially since during all the centuries since then accurate navigation was needed, even around Afrika, and not make journeys last far longer by keeping an incorrect map.
Nautical navigation is where the Mercator map is actually the most useful. Any straight line drawn in it stays true and any angles are preserved. That’s why every nautical chart is done using a Mercator projection. It’s just not so great when blown up to the size of the world, but that was never really it’s intention.
It was intentional as propaganda. During the Cold War, it made the U.S.S.R. look bigger and more of an imposing threat to the west.
It was intentional as propaganda. During the Cold War,
Nope. It is hundreds of years older that that.
Yes it is older than that.
That doesn’t discount the fact that it was selected for that purpose.
That doesn’t discount the fact that it was selected for that purpose.
WTF of course it discounts the fact that it was “selected for that purpose”.
This is like that one American Dallas county commissioner, William Price, getting offended it’s called Black Hole.
The notion that projections perpetuate some racial agenda is exactly the pseudo-intellectual victimhood that takes away oxygen in the room for actual issues to be addressed.
That’s why I use the dymaxian projection
Gall-Peters 4EVA!
