Robinson always looked the best to me

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.

As a Dvorak user, why not dymaxion

Shoes with toes wtf

Damn the Goode called me tf out

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.

It's not a damn campaign. Activists never seem to be good at nuance.

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

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

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

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.

Me too! Also the Waterman Butterfly.

I prefer to unfold a map to read it, as opposed to doing origami just to figure out where I'm going.

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.

They did. They are specifically advocating for the Equal Earth projection.

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.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gall%E2%80%93Peters_projection