Thursday, 3 March 2016

Every Battle Ever Mapped

A Dutch company is attempting to map all the battles in history, and so far it has counted 12,703 of them. 
It looks like Europe and the US are the bloodiest parts of the world with Greenland, Canada, Russia and Australia coming out of it with relatively few dots on it's land.
The data project Nodegoat has the first recorded military conflict in history as the Battle of Zhuolu, in eastern China, in about 2500BC.
Unfortunately, as us humans are a bunch of idiots the map will forever need to be updated for new conflicts.   

14 comments:

Keep Life Simple said...

So you cannot read a map or a budget. The Middle East and Far East are the worst followed by Europe.

Falling on a bruise said...

What? I am guessing you never got that beginners guide to finance and map reading from Santa this year then. I have dispatched a 5 year old with an atlas to show you where the middle east is.

Keep Life Simple said...

I already know, it is all those red spots IN THE MIDDLE

Falling on a bruise said...

5 year old - 'but Lucy, almost the entire continent of Europe is covered and half of the USA so how can the middle east be more covered?.
Lucy - I know 5 year old child, I think Mr q has been sniffing his guns again. Just nod and smile patronisingly.

Keep Life Simple said...

Color indicates intensity little 5 year old, so red means a lot more battles than yellow. Don't bother telling ms Lucy it would be a waste time...

Falling on a bruise said...

Smiling and nodding patronisingly here.

Falling on a bruise said...

5 yr old - Lucy, I don't think Mr q knows that the colour of the dots corresponds to the date of the conflict and not the intensity. Does he not know how to use a key to the map?
Lucy - just carry on smiling 5 yr old.

Keep Life Simple said...

Interesting. The map you showed had no key. I went to the website and now the map is revealed to be bullshit.

There have been no military conflicts on the US mainland since circa 1880.

I also noted that the dots are piled on top of each other in Europe, the Middle East, and Asia.

Keep Life Simple said...

but you are correct, lacking a key, I assumed the red meant intensity which is pretty common for maps:
- blue is no activity
- green is some
- yellow is more
- orange is a lot
- red is the most

Falling on a bruise said...

You made an assumption and went with it rather than find out what the colours meant, that's what's interesting.

Keep Life Simple said...

Why is that so interesting? You make assumptions that scientists are unbiased, and that Marx was right in spite of all the failed Marxists, and that socialism will work for a nation bigger than a good sized city. I could go on.

Falling on a bruise said...

It shows your slapdash attitude towards research which explains why you are woefully ignorant on son matters such as climate change and would rather go with what you choose to believe rather than fact find for yourself. It does make sense considering just how plain wrong you are on many subjects.

Keep Life Simple said...

Except I'm a researcher and use statistics to model new processes via design of experiment. So I know that what the scientists don't say, that they should say, which is "we are making hundreds of known assumptions, and we know there are still many unknowns". But that would be pouring water on the global warming fire.

Falling on a bruise said...

Good for you, still wrong about it all of course but well done you for refusing to follow the rest and continuing to beat your lonely frum.