Mercator Projection...

[_subgenius]

Is Mercator used much anymore? I don't recall seeing that horizontal border between the western U.S. and Canada lately.

Um...yeah....for example, Google maps uses it

[_subgenius]

. . . in what ways does the persistent use of a distorted reality in order to maintain an uncompromising position not equate to tyranny?

Because it isn't a big deal and nobody is getting hurt.

That's arguable. ..highly arguable, in my opinion.

One of the most glaring problems with mercator is that it distorts the North hemisphere into appearing much bigger. ..thus reinforcing a eurocentric bias...a visual promotion of dominance through a basic and primitive methodology.
But maybe eurocentric thinking isn't a "big deal" and never hurt anyone.

You can also refer to season 2 episode 16 of West Wing.

To underestimate the power and influence that cartography has, at any scale, is dangerous and naïve. And this applies to either being too accurate or not enough

[_subgenius]

... the persistent use of a distorted reality in order to maintain an uncompromising position ...

Wait... are you talking about the Mercator projection here, or Fox News' Benghazi reporting? ; )

I believe this snippet was from where I was "talking about" tyranny.

[_Dr. Shades]

One of the most glaring problems with mercator is that it distorts the North hemisphere into appearing much bigger. ..thus reinforcing a eurocentric bias...a visual promotion of dominance through a basic and primitive methodology.
But maybe eurocentric thinking isn't a "big deal" and never hurt anyone.

By that logic, then we all have a Greenlandcentric bias. I can't imagine how many people have been hurt by that. The horror!

[_subgenius]

One of the most glaring problems with mercator is that it distorts the North hemisphere into appearing much bigger. ..thus reinforcing a eurocentric bias...a visual promotion of dominance through a basic and primitive methodology.
But maybe eurocentric thinking isn't a "big deal" and never hurt anyone.

By that logic, then we all have a Greenlandcentric bias. I can't imagine how many people have been hurt by that. The horror!

If Greenlanders had pursued colonialism and exceptional-ism like most European nations then you would certainly be correct, and they most certainly would have benefited by an exaggeration of their geographic prowess.

However, i appreciate that you consider any distortion of perception or adherence to a perception to be "harmless"...i also appreciate your overt promotion of a condition whereas "secret history" is left as such simply based upon the perception that revelation should serve only to alleviate harm.

for example, your mind cannot resolve the fact that the second image is more accurate to reality whereas the first image is not...but why challenge your view after 500 years, right?



http://www.genekeyes.com/WATERMAN-REVIE ... terman.jpg
http://www.atlasrider.com/peters-map-vs ... rojection/
http://i.imgur.com/AOzGCcf.jpg

[_Analytics]

When I was in college, somebody wrote a letter to the editor of the school paper complaining about the Mercator Projection--he basically said it was a euro-centric conspiracy to marginalize blacks by marginalizing the size of Africa (all 'dem fascist liberal nut jobs are the same!).

Over the next few weeks, at least three geography students wrote letters defending Mercator, and they said the same specific thing in their responses--that if somebody could figure out a better way to put the round earth on flat paper, they would make a fortune. Thus, if the critic wanted to create a better map, he would get rich by doing so.

I couldn't help but imagine they all had the same jaded geography professor who spent his career trying to make a fortune by making a better map, but ended up settling for a university job and crushed dreams.

[_ludwigm]

Hungary is a little flyspeck on any map.

F# You all!
We are the MARTIANS !

HERE we are !!!


And here I am...

[_ludwigm]

And Happy Christmas to all others with pictures !

[_canpakes]

for example, your mind cannot resolve the fact that the second image is more accurate to reality whereas the first image is not...but why challenge your view after 500 years, right?



http://www.genekeyes.com/WATERMAN-REVIE ... terman.jpg
http://www.atlasrider.com/peters-map-vs ... rojection/
http://i.imgur.com/AOzGCcf.jpg

I imagine that there aren't too many folks who are interested enough in maps that see either image as accurate. The top image may show the central areas in proportions that seem to roughly correspond with what we think we know about land mass relationships closer to the equator but the sizes of Greenland and Antarctica clearly transmit that this representation has major problems, and is ultimately concluded to be pretty distorted. Your assumption may not hold up.

When I was in my primary school days, Goode's projection was all the rage, and as choppy as the layout is, it holds a good balance with actual land mass size relationships, and usability in representing the whole.

Since then, any other projection style has just looked a bit weird to me.

[_Dr. Shades]

If Greenlanders had pursued colonialism and exceptional-ism like most European nations then you would certainly be correct, and they most certainly would have benefited by an exaggeration of their geographic prowess.

Implying that most European nations are somehow benefiting in any way from an exaggeration of their geographic "prowess" (whatever that means).

However, i appreciate that you consider any distortion of perception or adherence to a perception to be "harmless"...

No, only when it comes to a perception of map projections.

i also appreciate your overt promotion of a condition whereas "secret history" is left as such simply based upon the perception that revelation should serve only to alleviate harm.

I didn't say anything about alleviating harm. You're the one who used the word "tyranny" to describe something as mundane as a two-dimensional projection, not me. I simply said that nobody is harmed by a two-dimensional projection. If you disagree, please show me someone who got cancer or contracted HIV from a Mercator Projection (or any other projection, for that matter).

for example, your mind cannot resolve the fact that the second image is more accurate to reality whereas the first image is not...but why challenge your view after 500 years, right?

Of course I can. But it doesn't look nearly as cool.