|
If that is the flag from after WWI, why does the Swedish one retain the "herring salad" union emblem? They stopped using that one in 1905 after the dissolution of the personal union with Norway.
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2014 16:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 12:13 |
|
|
ThePutty posted:this will be dumb, but why is it white? am I missing something there I believe they were too lazy to make a new flag and just edited it in 1914. This is the flag during WWI from what a local amateur historian told me. EDIT: Germany was kicked out of Asia and had its concessions taken well before Versailles. DOUBLE EDIT: That flag was not official either. It was just a flag to represent an ad hoc government of businessmen that China allowed to rule the city. RocknRollaAyatollah fucked around with this message at 16:18 on Nov 8, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2014 16:14
|
|
|
Didn't know Sweden-Norway had such a presence there, or Denmark for that matter. Gotta do some digging on that.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2014 16:24
|
|
|
at least the aral sea gets to make a comeback if the seas rise
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2014 16:28
|
|
|
Pimpmust posted:Didn't know Sweden-Norway had such a presence there, or Denmark for that matter. Gotta do some digging on that. Alas, poor Denmark, I knew him well.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2014 16:29
|
|
|
Pimpmust posted:Didn't know Sweden-Norway had such a presence there, or Denmark for that matter. Gotta do some digging on that. Oh hey at least Russia is gonna get a warm water port. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2014 16:33
|
|
|
ThePutty posted:at least the aral sea gets to make a comeback if the seas rise I don't think it will, that was a known problem with the algorithm last time I saw that map.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2014 16:35
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:I don't think it will, that was a known problem with the algorithm last time I saw that map. It might if it links with Caspian.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2014 16:50
|
|
|
Pimpmust posted:Didn't know Sweden-Norway had such a presence there, or Denmark for that matter. Gotta do some digging on that. Is it bad that all I can think about is how fun it'd be to play CK2 as a merchant republic on this map? 
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2014 16:51
|
|
|
DrSunshine posted:Is it bad that all I can think about is how fun it'd be to play CK2 as a merchant republic on this map? Well some of your biggest competitors (Venice, the Netherlands, and the Hanseatic League) would all be underwater, so go for it!
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2014 16:52
|
|
|
The Caspian finally gets to be back with its ocean friends again. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2014 16:54
|
|
|
Even the Pannonian Sea is trying to make a comeback. A tiny, lakey comeback.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2014 17:04
|
|
|
The mainland of Greece seems to be nearly as big as it is today, that's remarkable.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2014 17:10
|
|
|
Pimpmust posted:Didn't know Sweden-Norway had such a presence there, or Denmark for that matter. Gotta do some digging on that. The Neverlands
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2014 17:14
|
|
|
Torrannor posted:The mainland of Greece seems to be nearly as big as it is today, that's remarkable. The magic of being like, all mountains.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2014 17:15
|
|
|
Kuwait and Iraq aren't doing to pretty there. I wonder what the Suez would look like there. How high is the water rising in that map?
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2014 17:22
|
|
|
my dad posted:Even the Pannonian Sea is trying to make a comeback. A tiny, lakey comeback. Yeah that's probably an error too, unless it's connected to the sea it won't rise.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2014 17:30
|
|
|
Count Roland posted:Kuwait and Iraq aren't doing to pretty there. I wonder what the Suez would look like there. I'm guessing 100m or so which is little extreme. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2014 17:38
|
|
|
Pimpmust posted:Didn't know Sweden-Norway had such a presence there, or Denmark for that matter. Gotta do some digging on that. That's the entire Po Valley, the Low Countries, Mesopotamia, Istanbul, Saint-Petersburg, London and Hamburg gone. However much of a worst case scenario this map might be, it really highlights the catastrophic level of population displacement such a rise in sea level would cause.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2014 17:54
|
|
|
Anosmoman posted:I'm guessing 100m or so which is little extreme. escape mechanism posted:That's the entire Po Valley, the Low Countries, Mesopotamia, Istanbul, Saint-Petersburg, London and Hamburg gone. However much of a worst case scenario this map might be, it really highlights the catastrophic level of population displacement such a rise in sea level would cause. A Buttery Pastry fucked around with this message at 18:04 on Nov 8, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2014 18:00
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:66m actually, which the national geographic article assumes as the sea level rise that would result from a full melt of every glacier/ice cap. These kinds of maps are really dependent on the resolution/fidelity of the map you're working with though, plus facts such as sea level rise not being uniform. (IIRC, 66m worldwide would be about 88m on the East Coast of the US for example.) Why is that? It would be a higher increase at the equator I'd think, and lower towards the polls.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2014 18:21
|
|
|
escape mechanism posted:That's the entire Po Valley, the Low Countries, Mesopotamia, Istanbul, Saint-Petersburg, London and Hamburg gone. However much of a worst case scenario this map might be, it really highlights the catastrophic level of population displacement such a rise in sea level would cause. wouldn't a lot of inland areas suddenly become a lot more fertile or at least viable for farming and population centres? i mean, this would inevitably kill probably hundreds of millions of people so at least if the world did sink the population would match the sudden lack of huge food areas
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2014 19:15
|
|
|
Problem is that most human cities, especially the big ones, are placed near water (connected to the ocean). Even if the inlands grows more fertile, that's almost all of civilization that needs to be moved/rebuilt, over a shortish amount of time. I know that the muncipal city planners around here are taking something like 1,2 meters into account over the next 100 years, so any new business close to the coast/river needs to do studies to account for increased erosion and the like. If we actually get up to 11 meters+ we're totally boned (but not as boned as Denmark/Netherlands)
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2014 19:20
|
|
|
ThePutty posted:wouldn't a lot of inland areas suddenly become a lot more fertile or at least viable for farming and population centres? i mean, this would inevitably kill probably hundreds of millions of people so at least if the world did sink the population would match the sudden lack of huge food areas I don't think gradual rising of sea-levels is fast enough to kill people...
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2014 19:21
|
|
|
DarkCrawler posted:I don't think gradual rising of sea-levels is fast enough to kill people... Well they might not drown, but if a hundred million Bangladeshi people had to pack their bags, flip a coin and head either east or west, I'd imagine we would have famines that Stalin woulda been proud of.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2014 19:23
|
|
|
DarkCrawler posted:I don't think gradual rising of sea-levels is fast enough to kill people... The effects of it are expected to kill plenty though. Changing disease ranges, wars, water issues, etc. Global farmland probably wouldn't change all that much from what I've read, large areas of Canada and Russia would become much more arable. Of course there are issues with those areas being remote and having no infrastructure for such things. Also farmland opening up in Russia doesn't really help a villager in Bangladesh or somewhere in central Africa turning even more arid.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2014 19:24
|
|
|
At the very least, it will finally provide incentive for people to stop thinking global warming is a hoax.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2014 19:25
|
|
|
I dunno, there are literally places flooding right now from sea level rising and it doesn't seem to stop the idiots. And not just weird brown people places, Venice is already being affected.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2014 19:29
|
|
|
Lawman 0 posted:Oh hey at least Russia is gonna get a warm water port. If all the sea ice melts won't they all be warm water?
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2014 19:31
|
|
|
ThePutty posted:wouldn't a lot of inland areas suddenly become a lot more fertile or at least viable for farming and population centres? That depends on the location IIRC. I saw a few articles recently about rising temperatures (and decreased rainfall) having the potential to utterly wreck wine production in Italy, Spain and Southern France (in case you don't know, grapvines get wrecked by excessive humidity and generally aren't affected by droughts, so you can imagine what that would mean for other crops). Lord help countries that are closer to the equator.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2014 19:44
|
|
|
Speaking of sea level rise, here's a map where you can enter how much you expect the sea to rise and see if you'll be underwater: http://geology.com/sea-level-rise/ My apartment will be on an island, and I'll have to take a boat to work 
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2014 20:12
|
|
|
Pimpmust posted:Didn't know Sweden-Norway had such a presence there, or Denmark for that matter. Gotta do some digging on that. In reality, the Netherlands would become an island with 50 meter high dikes along its entire circumference.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2014 20:54
|
|
|
Pimpmust posted:Didn't know Sweden-Norway had such a presence there, or Denmark for that matter. Gotta do some digging on that. These maps are always interesting, although I doubt the Gulf of Bothnia (northern part of the Baltic Sea) will be flooded that much if at all. Sea level keeps lowering there all the time, relatively rapidly, because the crust of the Earth is slowly recovering from the few kilometers of ice that pressed it down during the last ice age. Moderate estimates (that I remember reading from newspapers) seemed to indicate that the global rise of the sea levels might be just enough to slow or stop that but probably not counter it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2014 21:00
|
|
|
Carbon dioxide posted:In reality, the Netherlands would become an island with 50 meter high dikes along its entire circumference. Or an entirely domed underwater country.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2014 21:03
|
|
|
A map from the Middle-East thread, and politically-loaded as hell: Courtesy of Joshua Landis: 
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2014 21:50
|
|
|
fade5 posted:A map from the Middle-East thread, and politically-loaded as hell: The Middle East has a long and successful history of being divided according to straight lines through the desert
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2014 22:06
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:The Middle East has a long and successful history of being divided according to straight lines through the desert Beat me to it. But the straight lines look so nice, and clean!
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2014 22:14
|
|
|
Valiantman posted:These maps are always interesting, although I doubt the Gulf of Bothnia (northern part of the Baltic Sea) will be flooded that much if at all. Sea level keeps lowering there all the time, relatively rapidly, because the crust of the Earth is slowly recovering from the few kilometers of ice that pressed it down during the last ice age. Moderate estimates (that I remember reading from newspapers) seemed to indicate that the global rise of the sea levels might be just enough to slow or stop that but probably not counter it. The land is rising at the rate of ~10 mm/year (or less) so it wouldn't help a lot if most of Antarktis decided to melt within the next 100-200 years.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2014 22:24
|
|
|
Grand Fromage posted:The effects of it are expected to kill plenty though. Changing disease ranges, wars, water issues, etc. Global farmland probably wouldn't change all that much from what I've read, large areas of Canada and Russia would become much more arable. Of course there are issues with those areas being remote and having no infrastructure for such things. Also farmland opening up in Russia doesn't really help a villager in Bangladesh or somewhere in central Africa turning even more arid.  Count Roland posted:Why is that? It would be a higher increase at the equator I'd think, and lower towards the polls.  Basically, Greenland melting wouldn't be that much of a disaster for Europe, especially the countries that touch the North Sea. (The Netherlands possibly excluded.) Assuming it was just Greenland that melted, and the fallout from sea level rise everywhere else somehow didn't do anything here. Hell, it would actually make the West Antarctic Ice Sheet melting less of a big deal for the ones within the blue circle, since Greenland wouldn't be pulling that water all the way up here. Of course Europe's gain means someone else gets a little extra, that being places with a ton of people. However, I did misremember the facts a bit. North America getting the brunt of it would be from the WAIS melting, not a complete melt. Antarctica being where it is, and having about 10 times the ice of Greenland, pretty much makes the rest irrelevant. Though of course Greenland and the West Antartic Ice Sheet are the ones actually rapidly deteriorating, while the larger East Antarctic Ice Sheet is possibly growing due to increased precipitation. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2014 23:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 12:13 |
|
|
The map of Europe under 100 m of sea level rise is great -- are there similar maps for the other regions of the world? I'm interested in seeing how it'd look for East/Southeast Asia. EDIT: Best I can find-- 
DrSunshine fucked around with this message at 16:57 on Nov 9, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2014 16:54
|
|