|
Carbon dioxide posted:I think the map makes sense if you think of it like this: That seems unlikely. Is it really possible that more people in the UK have Welsh as a first language than have (say) Hindi or Arabic or French as a first language?
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2013 23:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 13:37 |
|
|
Also, land belongs to whomever controls it, and since the Tsarist period and the initial expansion East, the imperial Russian and then the Soviet government has made a point of keeping enough of a population there to control that territory. It is a big part of the reasoning behind the Trans-Siberian railroad in the first place. When you go to Russia, Russians will always mention how it is almost certain the Chinese (in their mind) will just take Siberia. It is paranoia that goes back a while that Canada just doesn't have and if it did, the population of Northern Canada would be much higher.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2013 23:29
|
|
|
I'm surprised Welsh is so high for Britain; I would've thought it would be Polish or Urdu.withak posted:That seems unlikely. Is it really possible that more people in the UK have Welsh as a first language than have (say) Hindi or Arabic or French as a first language? Yes, I've just checked the 2011 census:
TinTower fucked around with this message at 23:37 on Dec 14, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2013 23:33
|
|
|
Darth Various posted:Probably just straight ripped from the CIA World Factbook without much thinking. It lists Turkish as the second most common language in Austria and Portugese and Mirandese as the two official languages of Portugal. Well, that would explain it, I guess.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2013 23:33
|
|
|
TinTower posted:Yes, I've just checked the 2011 census: Well color me surprised.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2013 23:40
|
|
|
TinTower posted:I'm surprised Welsh is so high for Britain; I would've thought it would be Polish or Urdu. I think people forget that India/Pakistan have a ton of different languages.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 00:31
|
|
|
Had no idea Welsh was spoken that much. Would have thought mayne 20,000 people could speak it. Ardennes posted:I think people forget that India/Pakistan have a ton of different languages. And even the obscure ones probably have millions of speakers.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 00:35
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:I think people forget that India/Pakistan have a ton of different languages. Yeah, if you simplify it to "languages from India" vs. Welsh then it is 976k vs. 562k.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 00:52
|
|
|
DarkCrawler posted:Had no idea Welsh was spoken that much. Would have thought mayne 20,000 people could speak it. It's had an incredibly successful revival just over the past couple of decades or so; before then, you'd be right.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 01:06
|
|
|
MrChips posted:I doubt that was a factor. My impression is that the single biggest reason for this is that Stalin almost completely dismantled the entire industrial base of western Russia during WWII and moved it east of the Urals, out of the reach of the Germans. After the war, these factories (and cities) that sprang up continued to grow as part of their Five Year Plans, spurred on by the discovery of enormous amounts of natural resources. indirectly, it helped to further establish their claim to Siberia and fulfill their desire for a unified, Baltic-to-Pacific empire. I don't think that's true. It was mentioned in the Eastern Europe thread that Belarus is basically a big swamp and has pretty much always been a hilariously poor backwater to whichever of Russia or Poland was in power at the time, and that its Soviet nostalgia comes from the Soviets really being the first and only people to have ever bothered to develop it economically. There is no history of Belarusian state or industrial power as distinct from Russian, and so Belarusian was/is pretty much spoken by dirt poor peasants only. icantfindaname fucked around with this message at 05:38 on Dec 15, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 05:31
|
|
|
made of bees posted:Also, I could be wrong, but it looks like you can still see an old Silk Road route. Vivian Darkbloom posted:A dot map isn't quite right for this without much higher resolution, but you can imagine the general gist of it. Some places like the Midwest USA seem populated more than this map represents, though. I think that (at least the part not right in Xinjiang) is the Hexi Corridor, as depicted in this map of the Tang Dynasty which I've heard is a lot like what you get in Paradox games. There are a lot of mountains just south and a lot of desert just north. I think the Xinjiang part is the "northern" corridor north of the Taklamakan and south of the mountains, through Ürümqi. In other words, yes, Silk Road, for good reasons. Very cool to see. Higher res would be great.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 05:45
|
|
|
Vivian Darkbloom posted:A dot map isn't quite right for this without much higher resolution, but you can imagine the general gist of it. Some places like the Midwest USA seem populated more than this map represents, though. I'm always curious how these maps are made. Saying "put a dot at x number of people" isn't such a clear cut solution. They probably aren't using the mean center of the locations of 50,000 people. You also run into the problem of which 50,000 people to make into a dot. Odds are they political boundaries with known populations but that runs into the Modifiable Areal Unit Problem. These are the foreclosures in Charlotte, North Carolina in 2005. As in the actual x,y locations of each home foreclosed upon.  While you can run some statistics on the points, often you need them to be a part of a polygon. So you use already made boundaries like census tracts and census block groups. These are the same foreclosures, just put into census tracts and then represented as a dot density:  The dot density just represents the value and the positions may be completely off. This is much more apparent at a local level such as Charlotte and using 1:1. The world population certainly isn't off like this map set is but it does pose the question, what errors are made? So, not saying the map you posted is completely incorrect or anything, but it does pose problems for showing where things are by how it groups. It just makes me wonder what info was used to produce a map and then how was it produced.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 07:03
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:When you go to Russia, Russians will always mention how it is almost certain the Chinese (in their mind) will just take Siberia. It is paranoia that goes back a while that Canada just doesn't have and if it did, the population of Northern Canada would be much higher. Plenty of Chinese people say the same thing. It's not paranoia if they're really out to get you[r land], right?
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 07:29
|
|
|
Why would the Chinese even want Siberia? I can see them wanting the Russian ports in the far east to remove a naval rival on their doorstep, but there's no reason for them to invade the interior. It doesn't have any strategic value I can see, no really valuable natural resources, and most of Siberia is usually either incredibly cold or a mud pit, making an invasion extremely difficult.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 08:19
|
|
|
sincx posted:Plenty of Chinese people say the same thing. It's not paranoia if they're really out to get you[r land], right? Do they really? Do you have a source for that? I doubt the Chinese government would be interested in provoking a conflict over Siberia, even if Russia is generally in decline. I can only see it happening if Russia somehow descends into anarchy and there's a massive exodus of Siberians. Konstantin posted:It doesn't have any strategic value I can see, no really valuable natural resources, and most of Siberia is usually either incredibly cold or a mud pit, making an invasion extremely difficult. Russia is one of the world's leading producers of oil and natural gas, and presumably a large proportion of those fields are in Siberia. They won't last forever though, and in any case I don't see China invading when they can just dominate Siberia economically. Phlegmish fucked around with this message at 08:32 on Dec 15, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 08:25
|
|
|
China's got plenty of crazy nationalists.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 08:29
|
|
|
Siberia might have some use for the Chinese, but I can't imagine it would ever be worth the risk. Fighting Russia in an offensive war is and always will be a nightmare, even ignoring the fact that they have enough nuclear weapons to raze all of China ten times over. As Phlegmish said. Siberia would only be useful as a "pick-up" when Russia as a nation is dissolving entirely.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 08:30
|
|
|
Konstantin posted:Why would the Chinese even want Siberia? I can see them wanting the Russian ports in the far east to remove a naval rival on their doorstep, but there's no reason for them to invade the interior. It doesn't have any strategic value I can see, no really valuable natural resources, and most of Siberia is usually either incredibly cold or a mud pit, making an invasion extremely difficult. Russia and China had their first treaty about it in 1689, so in addition to any actual reason there's potentially at least three hundred years of nationalist nonsense.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 08:31
|
|
|
Konstantin posted:Why would the Chinese even want Siberia? I can see them wanting the Russian ports in the far east to remove a naval rival on their doorstep, but there's no reason for them to invade the interior. It doesn't have any strategic value I can see, no really valuable natural resources, and most of Siberia is usually either incredibly cold or a mud pit, making an invasion extremely difficult. No really valuable natural resources? It would be more difficult to think of a natural resource Siberia doesn't have in massive quantities than one it does have. Last year they discovered a brand new reserve of between 2-3000 tonnes of gold. That's worth at least US$76billion at todays gold price. Earlier this year they found another 200 tonnes in an oilfield by accident; that alone is worth US$760million. Nickel production in Siberias largest nickel production area was approx 300,000 tonnes in 2008. The price of nickel is approx $13k/tonne, so that was worth almost $4billion. And they have 40% of the worlds nickel. It's a similar story for other metals including tin, copper etc. There is poo poo loads of it in Siberia!
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 08:51
|
|
|
There could be a hundred trillion dollars worth of minerals under Siberia and it wouldn't be worth taking it militarily. Russia's held that land since Peter the Great's grandfather. The resources there mean about as much to Russia's survival as anything-they'd turn any attacker into slag before they surrendered it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 09:09
|
|
|
I don't think the PRC's government would mind some living space and minerals to the north (Siberia is a truly massive space, and it is very likely there is far more wealth than we know of) but yeah, as long as Russia has some type of military but more importantly nukes, it will be difficult. I think most of Russian fears are about undocumented immigrants coming across the border since there isn't that much they can do about them and over time it could very well change the region's demography. However, it is also possible Russia could enter a period of deep decline in the top too distant future especially if there is another financial crash. Even with energy prices rising, there are at a deficit and digging into their remaining reserves at a pretty quick rate and they will have a hard time selling their loans on the open market. I could see a cycle of austerity, IMF loans and/or high/hyper inflation in the near future.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 09:57
|
|
|
TinTower posted:I'm surprised Welsh is so high for Britain; I would've thought it would be Polish or Urdu. I swear we have to stop every few pages for people to realise that Welsh is an actual thing that Welsh people actually speak. I'd highly recommend that English people watch S4C and check out one of our many farming themed gameshows.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 10:00
|
|
|
Konstantin posted:Why would the Chinese even want Siberia? As a Balkans resident, and thus an expert on the subject, I can tell you the answer is: more clay=better
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 10:26
|
|
|
Given the role the Golden Horde played in the creation of the Russian state (both in actuality as well as mythically), it makes sense for the Russians to care about that sort of thing. What the Russians did in Europe after WWII is psychologically similar to what they had been doing to China/Mongolia for 300+ years. I mean, a collection of formerly vassal states brought together by the collective vision of their respective people to repel the invader and create a secure fortress (and all generation will honor her name). That's been Russia's MO for 300+ years, shining in glory for all men to see.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 11:31
|
|
|
If China makes a play for any land in that area, it will be for Mongolia, not Siberia. e: for content, here are the "traditional" (read: largest reach) borders for China, circa 1912-1949:  e2: a (slightly messy) more detailed map about what the ROC claims: 
computer parts fucked around with this message at 14:38 on Dec 15, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 14:30
|
|
|
Siberia does have vast quantities of natural resources, but I've heard that it's tremendously, prohibitively expensive to develop and extract there because of the harsh climate and landscape. So much so that the opportunity cost for not developing Siberia is relatively low compared to the cost of prospecting it. I'm no expert on Russian economic development or geography, though, so can anyone confirm/refute that?
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 15:29
|
|
|
DrSunshine posted:Siberia does have vast quantities of natural resources, but I've heard that it's tremendously, prohibitively expensive to develop and extract there because of the harsh climate and landscape. So much so that the opportunity cost for not developing Siberia is relatively low compared to the cost of prospecting it. I'm no expert on Russian economic development or geography, though, so can anyone confirm/refute that? Yeah, permafrost is a real bitch to dig/construct in. Though Russia only has to wait a few more decades before climate change melts it all for them.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 16:03
|
|
|
Shbobdb posted:Given the role the Golden Horde played in the creation of the Russian state (both in actuality as well as mythically), it makes sense for the Russians to care about that sort of thing. What the Russians did in Europe after WWII is psychologically similar to what they had been doing to China/Mongolia for 300+ years. I think its worth mentioning that the area around Vladivostok hasn't been under Russian control for as long as most of the rest of Siberia, and was previously considered a part of Manchuria until around 1860 until the Russians exploited the Opium war so that while Britain and France were smashing up the country they could persuade the Chinese to cede a chunk of their territory. This is a pretty huge area that China could make a pretty hard claim to if it wanted, since it only lost the area when it was in a period of severe decline as part of the "unequal treaties".  Manchuria in 1851. khwarezm fucked around with this message at 17:12 on Dec 15, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 16:12
|
|
|
TipTow posted:Yeah, permafrost is a real bitch to dig/construct in.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 16:27
|
|
|
The trick with permafrost is to insulate the foundation well so you don't transfer heat from the building into the ground, or use some kind of passive heat transfer system to keep the ground chilled.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 17:09
|
|
|
withak posted:The trick with permafrost is to insulate the foundation well so you don't transfer heat from the building into the ground, or use some kind of passive heat transfer system to keep the ground chilled.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 17:28
|
|
|
It's fine. With all the natural gas we'll be getting from Siberia, we can use it to power air conditioners and fans to help cool the permafrost!
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 17:30
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:Lack of permafrost can be a problem though, if the area just turns into marshes when it thaws. Apparently this has already caused substantial damage to buildings in Russia. Plus the climate change in the region might not be as useful as most Russians are hoping it will be, in terms of making the area viable for habitation. Well then those new wetlands will just offset all of the other wetlands we're busy destroying elsewhere.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 17:53
|
|
|
Yeah, shifting ground and gigantic temperature differentials are not going to help things when so much Russian gas already leaks out of the system already, one of the reasons why so much of the fields in Western Siberia are already being depleted. Russia desperately needs revenue from energy, and if supply, demand and speculative pricing fall all the same time...it is going to be real tough for tens of millions of people.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 18:00
|
|
|
eXXon posted:Well then those new wetlands will just offset all of the other wetlands we're busy destroying elsewhere.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 18:31
|
|
|
khwarezm posted:I think its worth mentioning that the area around Vladivostok hasn't been under Russian control for as long as most of the rest of Siberia, and was previously considered a part of Manchuria until around 1860 until the Russians exploited the Opium war so that while Britain and France were smashing up the country they could persuade the Chinese to cede a chunk of their territory. This is a pretty huge area that China could make a pretty hard claim to if it wanted, since it only lost the area when it was in a period of severe decline as part of the "unequal treaties". China has renounced claims on the Transamur Concession/Outer Manchuria. It would be the easiest part of Russia to justify reclaiming, though. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 19:16
|
|
|
Vivian Darkbloom posted:A dot map isn't quite right for this without much higher resolution, but you can imagine the general gist of it. Some places like the Midwest USA seem populated more than this map represents, though. Sorry to drag this up from the last page,but I just wanted to show something.See that small part of the west of Ireland?That's the area that was hit the hardest by the Great Famine.Between 1 million deaths and the emigration of around 1 million more,the country's population dropped by a quarter in around five years.The majority of the people who died were Irish speakers,part of why Irish is dying nowadays. Many people think that there was no food in Ireland at the time,but they're incorrect.The potato crop had failed,but there was still cattle and grain,among other crops.However,they were brought to Britain and sold there.If the food had stayed in Ireland,it's quite possible that no one would have starved. Anyway,that's my diatribe over,here's a map! 
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 21:00
|
|
|
DrSunshine posted:Siberia does have vast quantities of natural resources, but I've heard that it's tremendously, prohibitively expensive to develop and extract there because of the harsh climate and landscape. So much so that the opportunity cost for not developing Siberia is relatively low compared to the cost of prospecting it. I'm no expert on Russian economic development or geography, though, so can anyone confirm/refute that? Temperatures in Siberia during the summer months reach upwards of 25 degrees Celsius. I'm not sure how permafrost would stay particularly "perma" in those kind of conditions. If you haven't been paying attention to how rich Russian mining companies have become since the fall of the Soviet Union - and particularly over the last decade since China have started buying everything in sight - then I'm not sure what to tell you. The information is freely available via newspapers, television and the internet. I recommend www.google.com as a good starting off point. Put it like this: the two most mineral-rich countries on the planet are Russia and the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Which do you think gets nickel out of the ground most cheaply?
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 22:02
|
|
|
duckmaster posted:Temperatures in Siberia during the summer months reach upwards of 25 degrees Celsius. I'm not sure how permafrost would stay particularly "perma" in those kind of conditions. By having a lot of thermal inertia, and being insulated. Or are you just saying there are parts of SIberia without permafrost?
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 22:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 13:37 |
|
|
duckmaster posted:Temperatures in Siberia during the summer months reach upwards of 25 degrees Celsius. I'm not sure how permafrost would stay particularly "perma" in those kind of conditions. It's because, while air temperatures can vary quite a bit seasonally, soil is actually quite a good insulator, especially in the permafrost layer below about half a meter beneath the topsoil. Another factor is the specific heat of ice. It takes a rather large amount of energy to melt ice, so this combination is how it maintains a constant temperature, which is why there is a layer of permanently frozen soil below the topsoil, even during the short Siberian summer months.  Siberia contains one of the world's largest permafrost regions. The reason for this is due to the major continental area compared to North America. In the depths of the continental landmass, temperatures can vary much more dramatically. Consequently, it can get far colder in Siberia than in Canada, due to the relative distance from any bodies of water, which would otherwise trap summer heat and maintain a warmer climate. You can clearly see this disparity by comparing the land/sea area between North America and Eurasia. quote:If you haven't been paying attention to how rich Russian mining companies have become since the fall of the Soviet Union - and particularly over the last decade since China have started buying everything in sight - then I'm not sure what to tell you. The information is freely available via newspapers, television and the internet. I recommend www.google.com as a good starting off point. Wow, that's really harsh. The reason I asked is because I don't know a lot about what's happening over there and I was curious to see if what I had heard was bullshit or not and perhaps learn something. So thanks for enlightening me while subtly implying that I'm an ignoramus, I guess? I apologize that I'm not an expert in global affairs.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 22:28
|
|