|
Tree Goat posted:This checks out. Between Sharpe and Hornblower, it's a wonder that the British needed more than two guys to defeat Napoleon. Hey, don't ignore contributions of the wizards and dragons helping keep Britain free from tyranny and proper cuisine.
|
#
?
May 6, 2016 12:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 10:36 |
|
|
This horizontal red line divides Canada's population in half. Political because Mercator and all that.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2016 16:15
|
|
|
sweek0 posted:This horizontal red line divides Canada's population in half. Political because Mercator and all that. Political because circles of latitude aren't lines.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2016 16:38
|
|
|
sweek0 posted:This horizontal red line divides Canada's population in half. Political because Mercator and all that. What would the East/West divide look like?
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2016 23:26
|
|
|
I find it interesting that Canada's population would end up concentrated in Ontario rather than on the eastern coast. I assume the soil there is poor, and a major coastal trade center never developed for whatever reason.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2016 23:32
|
|
|
Phlegmish posted:I find it interesting that Canada's population would end up concentrated in Ontario rather than on the eastern coast. I assume the soil there is poor, and a major coastal trade center never developed for whatever reason.  It used to be where most people lived way back int he beginning of settlement, but the "more inland" areas are indeed much more fertile and over time were easily accessible from the sea pretty far in, and then after various projects accessible all the way into the great lakes. Plus, there were a lot of Americans nearby just across the borders, while the closest part of America to the Atlantic Provinces is also pretty dang uninhabited. Take a look:  ReagaNOMNOMicks posted:What would the East/West divide look like? You'd draw the line about like here (note: not very accurate at all): fishmech fucked around with this message at 23:42 on May 6, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 6, 2016 23:38
|
|
|
Also haven't the Maritimes been much more insular, less of destinations for immigrants and shedding population after the demise of cod
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 00:05
|
|
|
What happened to the cod? Did the Rock move there?
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 00:12
|
|
|
Phlegmish posted:I find it interesting that Canada's population would end up concentrated in Ontario rather than on the eastern coast. I assume the soil there is poor, and a major coastal trade center never developed for whatever reason. Montreal and Halifax are major ports, they just declined while Southern Ontario centered on Toronto rose as trade with Europe became less important than trade with the USA Edit: Toronto only passed Montreal as Canada's largest city in the 80's.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 00:22
|
|
|
MasterSlowPoke posted:What happened to the cod? Did the Rock move there? 400 years of intense fishing has quite reduced the catch. There was full on industrial fishing by Europeans by 1616, reaching to 10,000 employed by 1620 Fojar38 posted:Montreal and Halifax are major ports, they just declined while Southern Ontario centered on Toronto rose as trade with Europe became less important than trade with the USA Of course, Montreal is nearly 900 miles inland by water from the open ocean. Not coastal in the least! fishmech fucked around with this message at 00:26 on May 7, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 00:23
|
|
|
fishmech posted:400 years of intense fishing has quite reduced the catch. There was full on industrial fishing by Europeans by 1616, reaching to 10,000 employed by 1620 True. It is however on the St. Lawrence River which possesses direct access to the Atlantic Ocean. And of course with the St. Lawrence Seaway both Toronto and Chicago have access to the Atlantic despite being located so far inland. The Great Lakes are funny like that Fojar38 fucked around with this message at 00:29 on May 7, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 00:27
|
|
|
Map for thread relevance
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 00:30
|
|
|
Its interesting that Halifax didn't become a larger city. It has one of the best natural harbours in the world and is one of the closest points in North America to Europe. Guess it goes to show that it isn't location at all that makes a city grow.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 03:11
|
|
|
Jerry Manderbilt posted:Also haven't the Maritimes been much more insular, less of destinations for immigrants and shedding population after There's been a lot of stuff written on the economic demise of the Maritime provinces. It's been happening for 150 years and there's no one reason. It's been a combination of the economic centre of Canada moving west to Toronto, transportation of people and goods moving from the sea to railroads and air, decline of non-oil resource economies, low and not very dense population that doesn't lend itself to a service economy, and corruption and nepotism (the Irvings are assholes).
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 03:22
|
|
|
Count Roland posted:Its interesting that Halifax didn't become a larger city. It has one of the best natural harbours in the world and is one of the closest points in North America to Europe. Guess it goes to show that it isn't location at all that makes a city grow. Well the issue is that although it was close to Europe, it wasn't particularly close to anything else, especially not factories or vast swathes of farmland. Hence, its harbors mostly saw maximal use during wars, when it proved an excellent staging area for stuff coming over from north america or from europe.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 03:35
|
|
|
Physical proximity to market is important; the Maritimes have just always been poor so there's no market there. The soil and climate are poor and the region never industrialized in the way that central Canada did. If the market is in Montreal, which is accessible by oceangoing vessels, you'll just ship out of Montreal. Edit: I missed the boat on pointing out the historical poverty of the Maritimes.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 03:38
|
|
|
Fojar38 posted:Map for thread relevance  e: 
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 11:10
|
|
|
I never realized that so many big cities are on the Great Lakes but it makes sense Well, "Great" Lakes   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_lakes_by_area DarkCrawler fucked around with this message at 11:15 on May 7, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 11:13
|
|
|
The greatest Canadian urban tragedy is the decline of Montreal and the ascendancy of stupid-rear end Toronto.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 11:55
|
|
|
cheerfullydrab posted:The greatest Canadian urban tragedy is the decline of Montreal and the ascendancy of stupid-rear end Toronto. Having French or having population: pick one
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 14:57
|
|
|
DarkCrawler posted:I never realized that so many big cities are on the Great Lakes but it makes sense Technically, the Caspian sea is a saltwater sea in a separated bit of oceanic crust, not a true lake. And technically, Lakes Michigan and Huron are actually a single lake, one that just happens to have a narrow spot. But that combined lake is the largest freshwater one (by area) in the world, with Lake Superior next in line.  The Great Lakes are still kind of big.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 16:28
|
|
|
I wonder what kind of alt-history that alt-geography would produce.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 16:30
|
|
|
Powered Descent posted:Technically, the Caspian sea is a saltwater sea in a separated bit of oceanic crust, not a true lake. And technically, Lakes Michigan and Huron are actually a single lake, one that just happens to have a narrow spot. But that combined lake is the largest freshwater one (by area) in the world, with Lake Superior next in line. By area is the wrong measurement. Baikal sends its regards (it's so far ahead of your dumb "Great Lakes" they wouldn't be able to hear it first hand).
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 17:25
|
|
|
Powered Descent posted:Technically, the Caspian sea is a saltwater sea in a separated bit of oceanic crust, not a true lake. And technically, Lakes Michigan and Huron are actually a single lake, one that just happens to have a narrow spot. But that combined lake is the largest freshwater one (by area) in the world, with Lake Superior next in line. Jesus loving Christ these are big rear end lakes. 
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 18:48
|
|
|
ReagaNOMNOMicks posted:Jesus loving Christ these are big rear end lakes. Lakes so big that when strong weather cyclones come through the area, you see waves the size you would see out in the ocean. The Edmund Fitzgerald was struck by rogue waves as high as 35 feet (11 m) high before sinking during one such storm on Lake Superior.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 19:00
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:I wonder what kind of alt-history that alt-geography would produce. Juggaloism arises in Switzerland and Austria
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 19:04
|
|
|
ReagaNOMNOMicks posted:Jesus loving Christ these are big rear end lakes. The US is big.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 20:01
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:By area is the wrong measurement. Baikal sends its regards (it's so far ahead of your dumb "Great Lakes" they wouldn't be able to hear it first hand). Don't both Lake Baikal and the Great Lakes hold like 20% of the planet's liquid fresh water apiece?
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 20:03
|
|
|
khwarezm posted:Don't both Lake Baikal and the Great Lakes hold like 20% of the planet's liquid fresh water apiece?
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 20:48
|
|
|
Where is Breton Man? He's finally got his lebensraum.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 20:56
|
|
|
kalstrams posted:Baikal holds 20%, all 5 Great Lakes together amount to about the same. Baikal has fuckloads more water than any given Great Lake alone. Fun politically-loaded fact about the Great Lakes -- since they're on the border of the US and Canada, the amount of water each country is allowed to pump out of them (for irrigation, drinking water, etc.) has to be hammered out in international treaties. Except for Lake Michigan, which is entirely in the US. We can pump that sucker dry if we want, and nobody can tell us no. And now for the real rear end in a top hat part of that: remember how Michigan and Huron are actually one lake, just with a narrow spot that makes us want to give them different names? Yeah, water flows freely between them and they rise and fall together. So all we have to do is put the pumps on the Lake Michigan side, and we can drain Lake Huron too. 
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 21:14
|
|
|
Reality to the rescue. 
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 21:19
|
|
|
Shbobdb posted:Where is Breton Man? He's finally got his lebensraum. That map also puts most of my family right about where Neuchâtel is now so all in all I'm in favor of it.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 21:22
|
|
|
Looks like Paris mergitur after all
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 21:43
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:Reality to the rescue. Shameful lakes.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 22:48
|
|
|
Powered Descent posted:Fun politically-loaded fact about the Great Lakes -- since they're on the border of the US and Canada, the amount of water each country is allowed to pump out of them (for irrigation, drinking water, etc.) has to be hammered out in international treaties. Sorry, but real Americans would build canals that connect these lakes and then pump them out all at once. 
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 23:02
|
|
|
Disco Infiva posted:Sorry, but real Americans would build canals that connect these lakes and then pump them out all at once. There ARE canals that connect all those lakes. The issue is the elevations. Lake Ontario's surface is at 243 feet above sea level, Lake Erie's at 571 feet, Lake Michigan at 577 feet, Lake Huron at 581 feet and Lake Superior at 591 feet. Hence, you can only really use the unliited access to Lake Michigan water to drain out Huron and Superior as well, with maybe a little bit sucked out from Erie. Lake Ontario escapes untapped. (Incidentally, this means that while parts of Lake Ontario are below sea level, none of the rest of the lakes are).
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 23:34
|
|
|
what if you froze it and lifted it all out in one piece
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 23:49
|
|
|
Flipperwaldt posted:what if you froze it and lifted it all out in one piece Giant blocks of ice are actually how the lakes got there in the first place.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2016 01:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 10:36 |
|
|
cheerfullydrab posted:The greatest Canadian urban tragedy is the decline of Montreal and the ascendancy of stupid-rear end Toronto. Ignoring the likely inevitability of this occurring, every time I have been to Montreal it has been a decaying piece of poo poo and goons only like it because you get good weed there.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2016 02:50
|
|