• bdonvr@thelemmy.club
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    82
    ·
    13 hours ago

    I mean it’s greatly exaggerated on Mercator but it’s definitely not tiny.

    It’s bigger than Australia

  • skisnow@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    9 hours ago

    Fun fact, Mercator would in principle be even more distorted than it is, but almost every map that uses it crops at least the top and bottom 5 degrees to hide it. Mercator’s original cropped to 66°S - 80°N, which shifts Europe towards the middle.

    • MufinMcFlufin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 hours ago

      Are we going with Eurasia or an Afro-Eurasia distinction? I feel like if someone were to insist on Afro-Eurasia then they also have to accept The Americas, or I guess it would just be a simple “America” which would get confusing since that’s a pretty common verbal shorthand for USA. Under that sort of definition I think if you still insist on North and South America as regions then you’d have to also accept North and South Afro-Eurasia.

      It’d also be pretty funny to try to argue that since North America was connected to Asia within the human timeline it should also be added. Imagine trying to refer to the continents: AfroAmeriEurasia, Australia, and Antarctic, with an optional Oceania thrown in the mix.

      For clarity, I usually just go with North/South America, Australia, Antarctica, Africa, and Eurasia as the continental landmasses