The world maps are lying to us!

[JumpyTheFrog]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2596783/Why-world-map-youre-looking-WRONG-Africa-China-Mexico-distorted-despite-access-accurate-satellite-data.html

 

Africa is way bigger than it looks and Alaska and Greenland are smaller than they look. I knew that making an accurate flat map was hard, but I feel like I've been lied to my whole life. This annoys me more than when Pluto was demoted from being a planet.

[38carrots]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2596783/Why-world-map-youre-looking-WRONG-Africa-China-Mexico-distorted-despite-access-accurate-satellite-data.html

 

Africa is way bigger than it looks and Alaska and Greenland are smaller than they look. I knew that making an accurate flat map was hard, but I feel like I've been lied to my whole life. This annoys me more than when Pluto was demoted from being a planet.

 

How about getting a globe? :w00t:

[Tsuga]

You have been lied to. In so many ways. You're not alone.

[Guest]

Yeah, this is why globes are good.

[happypamama]

My children are fascinated by this concept. We have a globe, a world map in Mercator projection, and a U.S. map (not entirely Mercator -- its longitude lines aren't parallel like on the world map) all together in our schoolroom, and they discuss why Alaska looks proportionately different on all three and other similar things with some regularity.

 

I remember seeing in oh, about fifth grade, pictures in a textbook of different maps. One type (Mercator) was most accurate for the equatorial areas, one was best for the middle latitudes (I guess like our U.S. Map), and the other was a flat disc-tyke map that made the poles accurate. I remember finding that fascinating.

[JumpyTheFrog]

I had a globe as a kid, but not since then. Maybe it's time to get one.

[Lady Florida.]

 

[Mimm]

Not trying to be rude but I'm surprised this is news to anyone.

[regentrude]

Africa is way bigger than it looks and Alaska and Greenland are smaller than they look. I knew that making an accurate flat map was hard, but I feel like I've been lied to my whole life. This annoys me more than when Pluto was demoted from being a planet.

 

Making an "accurate" flat map is not hard - it is impossible. You cannot project a sphere onto a plane and retain the areas and the angle relationships, shapes, distances.

The map maker has to make a decision which characteristics the projection is supposed to retain, at the expense of others.

The reason the Mercator projection became popular was that it is very suitable for navigation, because it lets straight courses be straight lines and preserves angle relationships with the meridians - which was vital for navigation, whereas true representation of area was not.

 

Any projection that aims to preserve area will distort angle relationships and is not any more "accurate".

 

If you want "accurate", get a globe.

 

 

 

[Ellie]

 

 

I love this.

 

#geographygeeksrule

[beaners]

 

https://xkcd.com/977/ :)

[Tanaqui]

Not trying to be rude but I'm surprised this is news to anyone.

 

She's just one of today's lucky ten thousand.

 

Undoubtedly there are things you don't know that she'd consider common knowledge. That's how being human works.

[redsquirrel]

Big block of cheese day!

[mamiof5]

Not news for us. As others mentioned, not necessarily a lie, just the results of trying to portray the globe on a flat surface.

[Jasperstone]

You can say that again!

 

This quote is so true-

 

'It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled.' 

Mark Twain

 

You have been lied to. In so many ways. You're not alone.

[Jean in Newcastle]

I remember this in our history and geography books.  They would show us the map in different forms and how the country's sizes compared.  In fact, I'm pretty sure I remember it coming up multiple times since it's pretty much an introductory map concept.  

[kitten18]

I had a globe as a kid, but not since then. Maybe it's time to get one.

I paid $10 for our globe at toys r us.

I kept thinking I should buy a nicer one but it's been 7 years now and this cheap one has worked just fine.

[Alessandra]

Another fan of globes here. We were doing an explorers unit recently. The Vikings sailed ALL the way across the Atlantic? Got out the globe and it was a hop, skip, and a jump from Norway to Iceland to Greenland. And Columbus's voyage got more impressive.

[JumpyTheFrog]

Well, I guess my school did even worse with geography than I thought. This stuff never came up in any classes.

[plansrme]

Not trying to be rude but I'm surprised this is news to anyone.

This is news to a lot of people. I would hardly call it common knowledge.

[Nan in Mass]

This is why TWTM says to use a globe, not a world map. : )

 

Mapmaking is complicated. Lots of fun math involved with everything from how many colours you need to portray countries to lat lon calculations and dead reckoning calculations and various projections. Very cool.

 

We did some projection projects in the logic stage involving a flashlighr and a soda bottle. I think they might have been in How the Earth Works? That book had many cool projects, including measuring the earth.

 

Nan

[redsquirrel]

In high school the "social studies' teachers had several maps of the world, of different projections on the walls.  One had the upside down map.

 

And I remember lessons about this in elementary school.  Anyway, I know that I have given my kids the rundown every year at the beginning of the school year.  And it comes up in science b/c there is no real 'top' or 'bottom' of our planet in space.  Do you notice how movie shows people looking at our planet with the northern hemisphere on top, even when the people (or aliens) are in space?  how is that possible?

[Greta]

I remember my 5th grade teacher being very clear about the fact that flat maps conveyed the shape of the continents, but not the relative size. And I remember discussing that in more detail in my 7th grade geography course. I had no idea that this wasn't generally well known, but like Tanaqui said, I know there are many, many things of which I am completely ignorant that are considered common knowledge by others. Guess I should thank my teachers for being thorough!

[Mimm]

This is news to a lot of people. I would hardly call it common knowledge.

 

I see that. I'm just rather surprised. I mean, it makes sense right? That anything drawn on a round surface can't be accurately transcribed to a flat surface. That's why this map exists. I remember seeing that map as a fairly young kid.

[Lady Florida.]

This interactive map is cool. It allows you to compare and see the true size of any country by dragging and dropping it into another country or continent. 

 

thetruesizeof

[JumpyTheFrog]

And I remember discussing that in more detail in my 7th grade geography course.

 

My school didn't have geography. The most we got was filling in some blank country outline maps of Europe in 9th grade social studies. That's it for 13 years of school. DH's school didn't even do that. The older I get, the more I realize how deficient our schools were.

 

ETA: My middle school taught approximately zero. I learned some stuff in earth science, math 1, and Spanish, but that's all because they were high school courses offered to middle school. History, the other two years of science and math, and English class were complete jokes. Oh wait, I did learn to type in one class...and play the original Oregon Trail. 

 

It's good to know that some middle schools actually teach something.

[Word Nerd]

This is news to a lot of people. I would hardly call it common knowledge.

I'd be quite surprised if it's not common knowledge. I'm not sure how either of us would be able to support our different impressions, though.

[redsquirrel]

There has been an overall moving on from geography in this country.  It seems to go along with not teaching grammar.  I seem to have been taught both and my son, now in public high school, seems to be getting a smattering of both. But it geography has long been on the back burner in schools.  I know because my MIL tells me that when she was a kid she always did very well in geography and wishes it was still taught.  However, then she goes on to say that country names etc change so often that it hardly seems worth the effort. 

 

But, teaching why countries change names and boundaries is very important to understanding quite a lot about our current geopolitical reality. I remember my grandfather saying something like studying geography didn't matter because everything kept changing.  Maybe that is part of the problem?  I do know that, by and large, Americans aren't interested in international affairs. Any news editor will tell you that Americans don't pay as much attention to that part of the news or read that part of the paper, or click on those headlines with as much frequency. Maybe it is a vicious circle and is also part our lack of geography and history?

 

In one of her audio downloads SWB says that when she was an adult her mother said to her something like, 'I forgot to teach you geography'.  SWB explains that we can't teach everything, but what is important is that she knew how to find the information she needed because she had been well educated.

 

So, schools can't teach everything, and neither can we.  I know that I seem to spend a lot of time on world geography, but very much neglect US geography. I just never seem to find the time.  The 13 colonies, Lewis and Clark, and the Civil war is where they are going to get the most of that information. I also do address basic map skills, but not to a huge extent. It comes up in history and earth science.

 

And FWIW, if I were queen of the world, I would want schools to pay more attention to teaching more and better history over geography. If the history is solid the geography will (or can) follow.  Geography without a solid foundation in history is just rote memorization. And that is exactly what my MIL says she was taught as a child. She certainly doesn't know any history, that is for certain.

[Greta]

My school didn't have geography. The most we got was filling in some blank country outline maps of Europe in 9th grade social studies. That's it for 13 years of school. DH's school didn't even do that. The older I get, the more I realize how deficient our schools were.

 

ETA: My middle school taught approximately zero. I learned some stuff in earth science, math 1, and Spanish, but that's all because they were high school courses offered to middle school. History, the other two years of science and math, and English class were complete jokes. Oh wait, I did learn to type in one class...and play the original Oregon Trail.

 

It's good to know that some middle schools actually teach something.

I sure didn't think my school was anything special when I was growing up. Small town Oklahoma K-12 school which I attended with the same 70 classmates all those years. But one good thing about the situation was that it was kind of "old-fashioned" and still taught things like phonics, grammar, geography, and some (though not enough) memorization. It wasn't until I got to college and my study group commented several times what good courses I had in high school because things that were new info to them were review for me, that I began to think maybe my school wasn't quite as lame as I had thought it was. :)

[Jean in Newcastle]

I looked up my state's standards of learning and there were map skills listed for every grade level.  It didn't have enough detail to specifically see when they taught this particular thing but since they cover the use of maps and how to construct maps etc. I'm fairly sure it is covered.  

[regentrude]

 

And FWIW, if I were queen of the world, I would want schools to pay more attention to teaching more and better history over geography. If the history is solid the geography will (or can) follow.  Geography without a solid foundation in history is just rote memorization.

 

But you cannot teach history without geography. The development of each city and country is intricately liked, and hugely determined by, geography.

The port city where different trade routes meet; a city at the confluence of two major rivers; a landlocked country without many natural resources; a country where high mountains isolate the different parts that belong to different tribes; steppes, deserts, jungles - all of these crucially determine history. Without looking at the geography, it is impossible to understand history.

 

[redsquirrel]

But you cannot teach history without geography. The development of each city and country is intricately liked, and hugely determined by, geography.

The port city where different trade routes meet; a city at the confluence of two major rivers; a landlocked country without many natural resources; a country where high mountains isolate the different parts that belong to different tribes; steppes, deserts, jungles - all of these crucially determine history. Without looking at the geography, it is impossible to understand history.

 

 

that's what was what I thought I had expressed.  I would want to start with the focus being on history because then the geography falls into line. Geography without a history is just rote memorization of maps with no context. And that is the sort of geography I see most people remembering, and waxing nostalgic about, at least those educated in the US. I can see why that would fall to the wayside in the crunch for time in a school day.

[Tanaqui]

I'd be quite surprised if it's not common knowledge. I'm not sure how either of us would be able to support our different impressions, though.

 

Poll time!

[QueenCat]

This is news to a lot of people. I would hardly call it common knowledge.

 

I learned it in elementary school, 4th-5th grade, as did my kids. I would consider it common geographical knowledge.

[JumpyTheFrog]

But you cannot teach history without geography. The development of each city and country is intricately liked, and hugely determined by, geography.

 

I was in college before anyone ever mentioned that geography influenced history. It was seriously a revelation to me when a European History professor mentioned Britain having a good navy because they were an island. I probably wouldn't have been surprised by early civilizations settling on rivers, but seriously, it blew my mind to think that some country being an island changed its development.

 

I guess that shows just how terrible my schools were with history. I got a 4 on the AP American History test, but that was just memorizing some names and dates with no real understanding of how everything was related. I have learned so much more history since we started listening to SOTW over and over, plus reading "The History of US (Concise Edition)" and K12's "The Human Odyssey."

[Laura Corin]

I was in college before anyone ever mentioned that geography influenced history. It was seriously a revelation to me when a European History professor mentioned Britain having a good navy because they were an island. I probably wouldn't have been surprised by early civilizations settling on rivers, but seriously, it blew my mind to think that some country being an island changed its development.

 

"

Around once a year someone on these boards asks how the loss of the American colonies is treated in British text books. The answer, 'It isn't, really' would be much more comprehensible from a geographical perspective: aggressive France right here vs irritating colonies way the heck over there.

[regentrude]

I was in college before anyone ever mentioned that geography influenced history. It was seriously a revelation to me when a European History professor mentioned Britain having a good navy because they were an island. I probably wouldn't have been surprised by early civilizations settling on rivers, but seriously, it blew my mind to think that some country being an island changed its development.

 

I remember that we discussed these connections in middle school history classes in my school. And history education in East Germany was not actually good -  I'd consider it the subject in which my school education was most lacking.

 

But I definitely recall that, for example, in 5th grade which covered Prehistoric through Ancient Greece, we learned about the role of Euphrates and Tigris for the developments in Mesopotamia and the Nile floods and their importance for the rise of Egyptian culture.

 

What do they teach in the American schools???

[Tanaqui]

America is a big country, both in size and in population. Our schools vary considerably from state to state, and within states from district to district.

[JumpyTheFrog]

But I definitely recall that, for example, in 5th grade which covered Prehistoric through Ancient Greece, we learned about the role of Euphrates and Tigris for the developments in Mesopotamia and the Nile floods and their importance for the rise of Egyptian culture.

 

What do they teach in the American schools???

We didn't have history (that I remember) until state history in 4th grade. I think we covered the founding of the colony through maybe the Revolutionary War. I know we discussed a few Native America tribes. 5th grade was American History and I don't remember what we covered, just that we sat in a circle taking turns reading paragraphs aloud from the textbook.

 

In 6th or 7th grade we covered a bit about ancient Athens and Sparta. I don't think we covered Mesopotamia, Egypt, or Rome. 8th grade was more poorly taught American History. 9th-10th was Global Studies. I remember doing some outline maps of Europe and learning about the 5 pillars of Islam. Whatever else we learned didn't stick (whereas I remember much, much more of what we learned in science classes). 11th grade was AP American History with a "dirty old man" teacher who loved to entertain us with stories about the time he stopped at the strip club "just for coffee."

 

In short, I don't think I ever had any sort of compehensive study of history of any period where the "story" of history was made clear. It was all "This happened and then that happened. Memorize these names and dates." I guess it's amazing that I got a 4 on the AP test with such poor teaching.

[regentrude]

America is a big country, both in size and in population. Our schools vary considerably from state to state, and within states from district to district.

 

Sure. Is history taught systematically in chronological order over the course of several years ( as opposed to a  one year Western Civ high school course or a regurgitation of the same narrow US history) anywhere?

 

[wendyroo]

In short, I don't think I ever had any sort of compehensive study of history of any period where the "story" of history was made clear. It was all "This happened and then that happened. Memorize these names and dates." I guess it's amazing that I got a 4 on the AP test with such poor teaching.

 

Yep.   :iagree:

 

This is what I said about my history education in a different thread:

"Social studies" was taught erratically all through my public schooling.  A semester drilling state capitals then two weeks celebrating Presidents' Day then a month learning about the history of Hawaii (we were in Michigan, not Hawaii) then two months learning about Hopi Indians then three weeks focusing on Plymouth Rock...I was an attentive, hard-working, profoundly gifted student and yet I never had a clue how any of it fit together.

That went on all through elementary and middle school, and then I filled my history requirement in high school with one psychology class and one history class which covered American History from 1776 until we ran out of time which ended up being around Nixon's election...we never even found out the plot twist at the end of that story.

 

By the end of my schooling I did not have gaps in my history knowledge, because gaps implies something solid in which there are just small missing pieces.  My history knowledge was not swiss cheese with gaps, it was outer space with a few specks of knowledge floating in an abyss of ignorance.

 

Wendy

[Pink and Green Mom]

I remember that we discussed these connections in middle school history classes in my school. And history education in East Germany was not actually good -  I'd consider it the subject in which my school education was most lacking.

 

But I definitely recall that, for example, in 5th grade which covered Prehistoric through Ancient Greece, we learned about the role of Euphrates and Tigris for the developments in Mesopotamia and the Nile floods and their importance for the rise of Egyptian culture.

 

What do they teach in the American schools???

 

I went to public school in New Jersey in the 70s/80s.  I remember studying ancient history (Mesopotamia, Egypt, Greece, Rome) for an entire year in either 5th or 6th grade (I think it was 6th).  We also learned quite a bit about prehistoric man as well that same year.  And then again in high school.

 

One thing I know we never really learned about was the Middle Ages.  It was all ancient history or US history.

[Jean in Newcastle]

I remember that we discussed these connections in middle school history classes in my school. And history education in East Germany was not actually good -  I'd consider it the subject in which my school education was most lacking.

 

But I definitely recall that, for example, in 5th grade which covered Prehistoric through Ancient Greece, we learned about the role of Euphrates and Tigris for the developments in Mesopotamia and the Nile floods and their importance for the rise of Egyptian culture.

 

What do they teach in the American schools???

I learned the same in American schools as you did in yours.  Education can vary widely from school to school in the US.  (I actually went to school in Japan most years but it was an American education with American textbooks.)

[PinkyandtheBrains.]

The map on our wall is Pacific centered modified Gall's projection. We also have a globe.  It does put a different perspective on things.

[Jean in Newcastle]

Sure. Is history taught systematically in chronological order over the course of several years ( as opposed to a  one year Western Civ high school course or a regurgitation of the same narrow US history) anywhere?

 

Young elementary - city, country life, careers, holidays (many which cover US history)

Fourth grade - state history in depth

5th grade - Early civilizations all over the world

6th grade - can't remember

7th grade - Civics (which was US history mixed with government)

8th grade - Geography of the World along with human geography

9th grade - Middle ages / Renaissance

10th grade - in my case, Japanese history in depth because even though I had an American education, we did acknowledge that we were in Japan (I know I had some Japanese history in elementary as well.)

11th grade - economics (which I include because it did touch on human geography) and US government

12th grade - Humanities (which was a class that melded literature and history of Western Civilization) and World History

[Renai]

I looked up my state's standards of learning and there were map skills listed for every grade level.  It didn't have enough detail to specifically see when they taught this particular thing but since they cover the use of maps and how to construct maps etc. I'm fairly sure it is covered.  

 

Map skills does not mean they are learning geography, just learning to read a map. Latitude, longitude, the compass rose, etc. That was also the type of information that was tested on standardized tests.

[JumpyTheFrog]

In all my years of school, we never really made it past WWII, with one day of "Oh yeah, the Korean war happened, too." I don't think we ever covered anything after.

 

I just remembered we spent some time on the Holocaust in middle school, including having a Holocaust survivor come and speak. That may have been part of English class though.

[regentrude]

Young elementary - city, country life, careers, holidays (many which cover US history)

Fourth grade - state history in depth

5th grade - Early civilizations all over the world

6th grade - can't remember

7th grade - Civics (which was US history mixed with government)

8th grade - Geography of the World along with human geography

9th grade - Middle ages / Renaissance

10th grade - in my case, Japanese history in depth because even though I had an American education, we did acknowledge that we were in Japan (I know I had some Japanese history in elementary as well.)

11th grade - economics (which I include because it did touch on human geography) and US government

12th grade - Humanities (which was a class that melded literature and history of Western Civilization) and World History

 

our schools back home do: Mandatory:

5th grade: prehistory-Ancient Greece

6th grade: Rome+Middle Ages

7th grade:Renaissance, Reformation, to French revolution+ American Revolution

8th grade:Napoleon-WW1

9th grade: post-WW1-post WW2

10th grade: 20th century after WW2

Students in 11th/12th grade can elect history as a subject or choose not to take history.

 

In parallel, geography is taught as a separate subject every year

5th grade - Germany

6th grade - Europe

7th - Africa (typo fixed)

8th- Asia

9th - the Americas

10th - geography&economy

In 11th/12th, geography can be elected or not. The courses have more analysis, incorporate ecology and demographic developments etc.

[Guest]

I remember that we discussed these connections in middle school history classes in my school. And history education in East Germany was not actually good - I'd consider it the subject in which my school education was most lacking.

 

But I definitely recall that, for example, in 5th grade which covered Prehistoric through Ancient Greece, we learned about the role of Euphrates and Tigris for the developments in Mesopotamia and the Nile floods and their importance for the rise of Egyptian culture.

 

What do they teach in the American schools???

I was in a fairly low performing, ghetto area of Southern California and I still learned all of that in middle school, too. Granted, it was the GATE class, not the normal education track, but my teacher talked about it a lot, as did our Houghton Mifflin social studies text.

 

Still, I loved the subject and cottoned on well. I could imagine half my classmates didn't pay close enough attention to really glean those connections. And given that well over half our school was ESL students, who knows.

[regentrude]

given that well over half our school was ISL students.

 

I don't know what that means.