|
TheBalor posted:The correct answer is that your Christianity is corrupt if you're not white. There's no judgment passed on the religion of Russia even while it declares vast swathes of the country to be barbarous, but when we suddenly come to a country that's been Christian longer than England and happens to be filled with black people? Clearly a degenerate, twisted form of the Gospel! Oriental Orthodox Christianity has been deemed heretical at the Council of Chalcedon 451. Something very theological about the nature of Jesus.
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2013 13:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 14:50 |
|
|
Badger of Basra posted:Why do the lights down the center line up in a grid pattern? It doesn't seem to happen further west or in more populated areas, so I'm not really sure what's going on. Cities out West tend to follow rivers because otherwise you're in a goddamn desert.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2013 13:27
|
|
|
Riso posted:Something very theological about the nature of Jesus. The Oriental Orthodox Churches oppose the mainstream idea that Jesus is one entity with two natures, divine and human. For what it's worth, it's the mainstream positions that have always struck me as frankly absurd, compared to the Nestorian, Arian etc. heresies.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2013 13:30
|
|
|
QVC Drinking Game posted:I'm a little surprised how dark Argentina is outside of Buenos Aires; same with Chile. Do those countries just have very concentrated population centers with not much between them (like the US mountain west), or is that a reflection of rural poverty? I can't speak for Argentina because I don't live there, but in Chile the capital(Santiago) is really THE place to be. There are about 17 million people in the country, of which about 5,5 million live in Santiago. That is nearly one third of the population concentrated in one city.  Furthermore, we have a really interesting and varied geography and climate, probably the most varied of any country. Towards the north we have a very arid desert, and in the south we have near inhabitable cold fjords, so what is left is the centre. However, the center is divided in 4, the Andes mountains easternmost, followed by the central valley, followed by the coastal mountains and finally the some more flat land by the sea. There is very little settlement in both mountain ranges. 
Medieval Medic fucked around with this message at 13:43 on Aug 26, 2013 |
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2013 13:40
|
|
|
Riso posted:Oriental Orthodox Christianity has been deemed heretical at the Council of Chalcedon 451. Something very theological about the nature of Jesus. I'm sure a British mapmaker cared a whole lot about the decisions of catholic conclaves.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2013 13:52
|
|
|
Randandal posted:West of about 100ºW the annual average rainfall drops dramatically and the land didn't support many pioneering farmers who would become the precursors to dense concentrations of smaller cities like the East has. Someone looking closely at these maps might notice that while development drops off dramatically in Texas below 30 inches of precipitation, that relationship weakens as you move farther north. This is mostly because in colder climates there is less evaporation, meaning the same amount of water goes farther in Minnesota than in Texas, and the land is able to support much more intensive cultivation.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2013 17:55
|
|
|
Randandal posted:Basically, if you plan on farming in the United States, you'd better eventually reach the Gulf of Mexico if you travel due south from your farm. Except a lot of the farming in the great planes is able to run on borrowed time by unsustainably draining the Ogallala aquifer. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2013 19:49
|
|
|
Dusseldorf posted:Except a lot of the farming in the great planes is able to run on borrowed time by unsustainably draining the Ogallala aquifer. Given that this map shows very little area where you will reach the Gulf of Mexico by heading south I'm not sure you're disproving his point.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2013 20:10
|
|
|
Mister Adequate posted:Given that this map shows very little area where you will reach the Gulf of Mexico by heading south I'm not sure you're disproving his point. Dusseldorf is saying that you could farm that area reasonably well despite the fact it is not directly north of the Gulf because of the aquifer.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2013 20:15
|
|
|
Oh hey I can't read, ignore what I said!
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2013 20:18
|
|
|
Maybe instead of saying "if you plan to farm", I should have said "if you plan to pass on your farm to your children and grandchildren"  I mean the High Plains can support agriculture, but it can't be very water-intensive crops. Cotton farming ought to be banned west of 100°W.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2013 20:25
|
|
|
Dusseldorf posted:Except a lot of the farming in the great planes is able to run on borrowed time by unsustainably draining the Ogallala aquifer. Virtually any draining is 'unsustainable' though, since the aquifer recharges so slowly. It's essentially a non-renewable resource unless you're looking at time scales in the thousands of years.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2013 23:33
|
|
|
Dusseldorf posted:Except a lot of the farming in the great planes is able to run on borrowed time by unsustainably draining the Ogallala aquifer. Tell me more about the Great Planes and the Flyover States, I am severely under-informed on the topic of avian agriculture.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2013 23:49
|
|
|
A huge area of Minnesota and the eastern Dakotas will face a water shortage, but Las Vegas and Phoenix are going to be just fine? Yeah right.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2013 23:52
|
|
|
reagan posted:A huge area of Minnesota and the eastern Dakotas will face a water shortage, but Las Vegas and Phoenix are going to be just fine? Yeah right. Vegas isn't marked on the map. I assume you're looking at Reno which probably draws it's water from Lake Tahoe. Phoenix is sitting on another giant aquifer, I guess it might not be ranked as much danger for desertification as other places because it's already sand dunes and tumbleweeds.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2013 23:59
|
|
|
I'm fairly sure this map hasn't already been used yet... While the ones in the British Isles don't surprise me at all, I hadn't realised Martin was so popular in France. Maybe I should cobble up a map for other areas/the USA.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2013 00:24
|
|
|
Technocrat posted:
There's one for the US already, from National Geographic. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2013 00:37
|
|
|
Dusseldorf posted:Vegas isn't marked on the map. I assume you're looking at Reno which probably draws it's water from Lake Tahoe. Phoenix is sitting on another giant aquifer, I guess it might not be ranked as much danger for desertification as other places because it's already sand dunes and tumbleweeds. I think what threw him off is that Las Vegas isn't marked but you would expect them to suffer water problems.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2013 01:07
|
|
|
Pakled posted:There's one for the US already, from National Geographic. EDIT: maybe I should learn the read the legend.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2013 01:48
|
|
|
Technocrat posted:I'm fairly sure this map hasn't already been used yet... I'm slightly baffled about why a Hungarian surname meaning "Croat" is the most common surname in Slovakia.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2013 01:52
|
|
|
I'm unnaturally curious as to why Moldova was left out of this map. And also Iceland I guess, but they needed to put the title of the map somewhere!
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2013 01:57
|
|
|
HookShot posted:I'm unnaturally curious as to why Moldova was left out of this map. That's not the map title, Iceland uses patronymic names instead of surnames.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2013 02:00
|
|
|
CellBlock posted:That's not the map title, Iceland uses patronymic names instead of surnames. Doesn't Russia do that too? Or maybe it's just for middle names.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2013 02:04
|
|
|
CellBlock posted:That's not the map title, Iceland uses patronymic names instead of surnames. Pretty sure that Hansen, Jensen, Andersson, and Joensen are also patronymics. I'd say title.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2013 02:04
|
|
|
HookShot posted:I'm unnaturally curious as to why Moldova was left out of this map. Iceland has no need for last names, everyone is everyone's family. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2013 02:06
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
CellBlock posted:That's not the map title, Iceland uses patronymic names instead of surnames.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2013 02:11
|
|
|
menino posted:Pretty sure that Hansen, Jensen, Andersson, and Joensen are also patronymics. I'd say title.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2013 02:15
|
|
|
menino posted:Pretty sure that Hansen, Jensen, Andersson, and Joensen are also patronymics. I'd say title. e; beaten etc.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2013 02:21
|
|
|
Kainser posted:They used to be patronyms, but they are just regular family names now. Iceland is the only Scandinavian nation (and apparently the only place in Europe) that still uses 'real' patronyms. Who's going to tell Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin that his country doesn't have patronyms?
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2013 02:33
|
|
|
Space Gopher posted:Who's going to tell Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin that his country doesn't have patronyms? Russian patronyms aren't the same. Russia has surnames that are consistent for the family, the patronymic is a middle name. In Iceland there is no permanent family surname, it's just the patronymic.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2013 03:00
|
|
|
I joined a new gym today and part of the selling point was "if you move more than 15 miles from one of our gyms, you can break the contract without penalties!" Eh, well, that doesn't matter to me but I could see someone thinking this was a good idea. Let's see what that 15 miles away looks like:  You have to leave the greater metro area to break your contract without penalty.That's actually only 47 of 50 of them. I didn't feel like messing with the geocoding because  .
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2013 03:10
|
|
|
GreenCard78 posted:I joined a new gym today and part of the selling point was "if you move more than 15 miles from one of our gyms, you can break the contract without penalties!" Eh, well, that doesn't matter to me but I could see someone thinking this was a good idea. Let's see what that 15 miles away looks like: To be fair, isn't that their point that you are always going to be close and that's why they are a good option?
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2013 05:53
|
|
|
teacup posted:To be fair, isn't that their point that you are always going to be close and that's why they are a good option? Yes, that is true. I go there because it's about a mile from where I live. However, it was just the way the person said it to me, it just sounded like a line built in to reassure someone there is a way out of the contract. You can definitely live in some areas where it's nearly 15 miles away, lovely traffic, etc and want to switch but cannot without breaking contract. I can see where I used to live and how much it'd suck to still be committed because the nearest gym was ~10 miles away or about 30 minutes driving because of dense traffic. The big flaw with this map is that it's also straight lines, not actual routes driven.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2013 06:09
|
|
|
I suppose this is the thread to ask this question. Would the Winkel Tripel projection be the best idea for a wall map? And does anybody know where to get it at an affordable price?
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2013 06:38
|
|
|
How big are you looking at? You get a poster sized one for free when you subscribe to National Geographic, and they probably have larger sizes available. Funny that you say Winkel Tripel instead of Robinson without knowing that though.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2013 06:55
|
|
|
Koramei posted:How big are you looking at? You get a poster sized one for free when you subscribe to National Geographic, and they probably have larger sizes available. drat, really? I kinda want that now.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2013 08:09
|
|
|
Per posted:Do you mean latitude? A bit ago, but the mnemonic my social studies teacher taught me: say laaaatitude and looooongitude incredibly exaggeratedly. Your lips form a horizontal line-like shape for latitude and a vertical one for longitude. She predicted that the day of the test that had a question on coordinate systems, practically everybody in the class would be mouthing the words to themselves. And what do you know! Also, I credit her with me remembering the terminology to this very day.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2013 09:09
|
|
|
Technocrat posted:
Yeah Martin is definitely the most common French family name, phonebooks have whole pages of Martins. No idea why this one is more common than others. Also Luxembourg isn't included which makes me super curious about what's the most common name there. Kurtofan fucked around with this message at 12:12 on Aug 27, 2013 |
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2013 12:10
|
|
|
Technocrat posted:I'm fairly sure this map hasn't already been used yet... For Sweden, Andersson has been since last year i think surpassed by Johansson as the most common surname.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2013 14:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 14:50 |
|
|
Zohar posted:I'm slightly baffled about why a Hungarian surname meaning "Croat" is the most common surname in Slovakia. Historically Slovakia was part of Hungary, together with some Southern Slavic regions. The surname got widespread due to internal migration and colonization, during which numerous Slovaks left for "Lower Countries" of Hungary and at the same time Southern nationalities (particularly Serbs) and people of Roma descent settled in Slovakia - and brought the surname "Croat" with them, of course written in the official Hungarian language (it's to be noted that Hungarian bureaucracy assigned migrants new surnames, generally according to place of descent, so even people who originally had other surnames became Horvaths). steinrokkan fucked around with this message at 14:22 on Aug 27, 2013 |
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2013 14:19
|
|
