politically-loaded maps: sputtering flemishly

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > politically-loaded maps: sputtering flemishly

«‹›2305 »

Peanut President: Nov 5, 2008; by Athanatos

America's entire idea is a strongman who oversees the country. That's why our first president was a General.

# ? Nov 12, 2016 20:06

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 7, 2024 23:24

Badger of Basra: Jul 26, 2007

Peanut President posted:

America's entire idea is a strongman who oversees the country. That's why our first president was a General.

What about the second through sixth presidents, who were all limp-wristed sissies?

# ? Nov 12, 2016 20:11

Randandal: Feb 26, 2009

fishmech posted:

There were hardly any proportional representation or instant runoff vote based democracies back in the 18th century, you realize?

Most of the colonies that became the US already had UK Parliament-modeled legislatures, elected first past the post from geographic constituencies. Nobody really felt like that was a problem, especially since they still considered it fine to have requirements that you be a white male over 21 who owned property to vote. So when the constitution was being planned, they kept that same idea for the national legislature as well.

If I recall right, the French revolutionaries also used first past the post voting from geographic constituencies for all of the various offices and systems of legislatures they tried, even though they tried like 5 different forms before Napoleon became emperor.

The thing you're thinking of with low population states is the compromise that led to the Senate having 2 Senators from every state regardless of population (to appease the small states) and the House of Representatives having varying representatives per state based on population (to appease the large states). Incidentally, this is why the Senators were originally elected by the state legislatures, and why there was (and is) no requirement that Presidential electors in the electoral college are determined by popular vote - in both cases they're actually meant to represent the States, not necessarily the people.

Here''s some maps of that in action, the popular vote in early Presidential elections:

Monroe winning by larger margins than Kim-Jong-Un

# ? Nov 12, 2016 22:13

Pakled: Aug 6, 2011; WE ARE SMART

Randandal posted:

Monroe winning by larger margins than Kim-Jong-Un

Just goes to show that bad things always happen to political parties that collaborate with hostile foreign governments!

Wait...

# ? Nov 12, 2016 22:16

fishmech: Jul 16, 2006; by VideoGames; Salad Prong

Randandal posted:

Monroe winning by larger margins than Kim-Jong-Un

He ran effectively unopposed that year! The other major party, the Federalists, had essentially collapsed, and they didn't even nominate a candidate. The only thing that stopped Monroe from being unanimously elected in the electoral college was a faithless elector deciding to vote for another Democratic-Republican candidate who didn't even run or get any popular vote, solely because he wanted George Washington to be the only unanimously elected president.

Only registered members can see post attachments!

# ? Nov 12, 2016 22:17

Peanut President: Nov 5, 2008; by Athanatos

Badger of Basra posted:

What about the second through sixth presidents, who were all limp-wristed sissies?

Shaking things out.

# ? Nov 13, 2016 00:03

HorseRenoir: Dec 25, 2011; Pillbug

https://twitter.com/Quality_Anime/status/797582740321226753

# ? Nov 13, 2016 01:23

majormonotone: Jan 25, 2013

You know, other than the misspellings and Denver being labeled as Dallas, that's pretty good

# ? Nov 13, 2016 02:42

Pakled: Aug 6, 2011; WE ARE SMART

# ? Nov 14, 2016 23:29

Squalid: Nov 4, 2008

Pakled posted:

This map is representative of a broader problem some conservationists have identified in the US national park system. Species at greatest risk of extinction are concentrated in areas with relatively little protection.

Below: six maps depicting the concentration of endemic species. Endemic species are those found only in one small location, like a fish found in only a single tributary. In descending order on the left side: Mammals, birds amphibians. Descending on the right: reptiles, freshwater fish, trees (probably derived from the same source as Pakled's map.

# ? Nov 15, 2016 06:53

Hambilderberglar: Dec 2, 2004

Squalid posted:

This map is representative of a broader problem some conservationists have identified in the US national park system. Species at greatest risk of extinction are concentrated in areas with relatively little protection.

Below: six maps depicting the concentration of endemic species. Endemic species are those found only in one small location, like a fish found in only a single tributary. In descending order on the left side: Mammals, birds amphibians. Descending on the right: reptiles, freshwater fish, trees (probably derived from the same source as Pakled's map.

What exactly is happening in that part of the US that it seems to result in a much greater diversity of species? As far as I know these areas have been subject to intense settlement and human activity for a couple of hundred years at this point, how are all these endemic species not having their habitats trashed?

# ? Nov 15, 2016 12:35

Ras Het: May 23, 2007; when I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child - but now I am a man.

I don't actually know anything about that, but I would guess that it has to do with the more humid climate and that those areas were settled before the doomsday brutality of modern agribusiness and forestry.

# ? Nov 15, 2016 12:41

steinrokkan: Apr 2, 2011; Soiled Meat

If you wanna read up on that, search for "North American coastal plain". AFAIK it is because of a very stable climate in combination with regional fragmentation by altitudal differences, river valleys etc, which supports strong speciation. Unfortunately only something like 5% of original habitats remains, and only 2% of original pine savannah growths, which are by far the most biologically diverse biome in North America.

# ? Nov 15, 2016 13:00

Konstantin: Jun 20, 2005; And the Lord said, "Look, they are one people, and they have all one language; and this is only the beginning of what they will do; nothing that they propose to do will now be impossible for them.

Climate is the biggest part of that, there is a strong correlation between warm, humid climates and genetic diversity. Species can evolve to fill more specialized roles when they don't have to deal with wide temperature variations and seasonal availability of food. Tropical rainforests are an extreme example of this, where you have animals that feed exclusively on one specific species of plant or live their entire lives in one tree.

# ? Nov 15, 2016 13:15

fishmech: Jul 16, 2006; by VideoGames; Salad Prong

Squalid posted:

This map is representative of a broader problem some conservationists have identified in the US national park system. Species at greatest risk of extinction are concentrated in areas with relatively little protection.]

Isn't that always going to be true though? A species in a highly protected area is always at a lowered risk of extinction - it's one of the reasons we protect places.

# ? Nov 15, 2016 14:20

boner confessor: Apr 25, 2013; by R. Guyovich

Hambilderberglar posted:

What exactly is happening in that part of the US that it seems to result in a much greater diversity of species? As far as I know these areas have been subject to intense settlement and human activity for a couple of hundred years at this point, how are all these endemic species not having their habitats trashed?

warm, wet climate leading to the growth of semitropical rainforest, wetlands, and swamps

from a human standpoint the south has traditionally been more rural, even today there's not much population in that part of the country. so even though the deep south has been subject to european habitation for 500 years or so (the inland south was pretty sparsely populated by native americans) a lot of habitat was left alone and even today isn't relatively unthreatened as far as virgin habitat goes. a large portion of the agriculture of south georgia is tree farms, which is basically just a forest

fishmech posted:

Isn't that always going to be true though? A species in a highly protected area is always at a lowered risk of extinction - it's one of the reasons we protect places.

i think the implication is that southern states have less environmental protections and are less prone to environmentally protect at the expense of agriculture, which is true

boner confessor fucked around with this message at 18:59 on Nov 15, 2016

# ? Nov 15, 2016 18:52

steinrokkan: Apr 2, 2011; Soiled Meat

boner confessor posted:

lot of habitat was left alone and even today isn't relatively unthreatened as far as virgin habitat goes. a large portion of the agriculture of south georgia is tree farms, which is basically just a forest

Unfortunately the most important sources of endemic populations are nearly gone, and in fact the whole region relies on second-growth forests after the old growth had been destroyed in early 20th century. In fact, it is the most vulnerable of all recognized global biodiversity hotspots.

# ? Nov 15, 2016 19:39

icantfindaname: Jul 1, 2008

Hambilderberglar posted:

What exactly is happening in that part of the US that it seems to result in a much greater diversity of species? As far as I know these areas have been subject to intense settlement and human activity for a couple of hundred years at this point, how are all these endemic species not having their habitats trashed?

hot and humid

# ? Nov 15, 2016 20:19

Squalid: Nov 4, 2008

fishmech posted:

Isn't that always going to be true though? A species in a highly protected area is always at a lowered risk of extinction - it's one of the reasons we protect places.

Think less in terms of proximate causes of extinction and more about the distal or ultimate cause, then refer back to the maps. Preventing extinction is one reason we protect places, but it was very much a secondary concern during the period in which most National Parks were created.

boner confessor posted:

warm, wet climate leading to the growth of semitropical rainforest, wetlands, and swamps

from a human standpoint the south has traditionally been more rural, even today there's not much population in that part of the country. so even though the deep south has been subject to european habitation for 500 years or so (the inland south was pretty sparsely populated by native americans) a lot of habitat was left alone and even today isn't relatively unthreatened as far as virgin habitat goes. a large portion of the agriculture of south georgia is tree farms, which is basically just a forest

i think the implication is that southern states have less environmental protections and are less prone to environmentally protect at the expense of agriculture, which is true

Uh... not really. There are no semitropical rainforests in the continental United States, pre-columbian Indian populations in the continental US were quite dense in the inland south-east (see all those mounds they left everywhere) and heavily modified the ecology producing the extensive fire-dependent systems like Longleaf savannas the south is now known for, virgin habitat is extremely rare, and last but not least tree farms are absolutely NOT "just a forest." Try taking a stroll through a five year old loblolly stand before thinning and then tell yourself that again.

That said I'm optimistic about southern biodiversity. The region is dominated by a different conservation modality than other regions, with "wild" land viewed more as a productive addition to the landscape to be used rather than preserved. It is possible to keep land productive and protect biodiversity, but the region definitely needs more progress.

Squalid fucked around with this message at 21:01 on Nov 15, 2016

# ? Nov 15, 2016 20:50

ulmont: Sep 15, 2010; IF I EVER MISS VOTING IN AN ELECTION (EVEN AMERICAN IDOL) ,OR HAVE UNPAID PARKING TICKETS, PLEASE TAKE AWAY MY FRANCHISE

# ? Nov 15, 2016 22:10

steinrokkan: Apr 2, 2011; Soiled Meat

Related to above, map of global biodiversity hotspots, not including the recently added North American coastal plains:

And the same data transposed on a terrible map of human population:

# ? Nov 15, 2016 22:15

Peanut President: Nov 5, 2008; by Athanatos

ulmont posted:

What's this?

# ? Nov 15, 2016 23:49

JosefStalinator: Oct 9, 2007; Come Tbilisi if you want to live.; Grimey Drawer

steinrokkan posted:

Related to above, map of global biodiversity hotspots, not including the recently added North American coastal plains:

kyushu

# ? Nov 16, 2016 00:06

ulmont: Sep 15, 2010; IF I EVER MISS VOTING IN AN ELECTION (EVEN AMERICAN IDOL) ,OR HAVE UNPAID PARKING TICKETS, PLEASE TAKE AWAY MY FRANCHISE

Peanut President posted:

What's this?

Red Cross Blood Services Regions. I had thought they were nationwide but apparently not by a long shot.

http://www.redcrossblood.org/our-regions

# ? Nov 16, 2016 00:30

Pakled: Aug 6, 2011; WE ARE SMART

ulmont posted:

Red Cross Blood Services Regions. I had thought they were nationwide but apparently not by a long shot.

http://www.redcrossblood.org/our-regions

I like that the region Chicago is in is named after college mascots from two other states.

# ? Nov 16, 2016 05:03

cinci zoo sniper: Mar 15, 2013

https://www.transparency.org/whatwedo/publication/7493

# ? Nov 16, 2016 13:40

Guavanaut: Nov 27, 2009; Looking At Them Tittys
1969 - 1998; Toilet Rascal

The only reason that the UK is at 0% is because they bribed the surveyors.

# ? Nov 16, 2016 13:45

Golbez: Oct 9, 2002; 1 2 3!
If you want to take a shot at me get in line, line
1 2 3!
Baby, I've had all my shots and I'm fine

cinci zoo sniper posted:

https://www.transparency.org/whatwedo/publication/7493

"Bribery Rates Across Europe and Central Asia*"

*Does not include Central Asia.

# ? Nov 16, 2016 17:50

GEORGE W BUSHI: Jul 1, 2012

Golbez posted:

"Bribery Rates Across Europe and Central Asia*"

*Does not include Central Asia.

The map is split across two pages

# ? Nov 16, 2016 17:57

Albino Squirrel: Apr 25, 2003; Miosis more like meiosis

steinrokkan posted:

Related to above, map of global biodiversity hotspots, not including the recently added North American coastal plains:

Sorry, the Amazon, Congo, and Australia-New Guinea rainforests are *not* biodiversity hotspots?

# ? Nov 16, 2016 18:56

steinrokkan: Apr 2, 2011; Soiled Meat

Albino Squirrel posted:

Sorry, the Amazon, Congo, and Australia-New Guinea rainforests are *not* biodiversity hotspots?

Sorry,I should have added that "hotspot" in this case signifies endangered status - all these regions have lost at least 70% of their original vegetation, while containing a certain share of endemic species (0.5% of total in the region)

# ? Nov 16, 2016 19:06