3 ms·

For the purpose of assessing how densely populated places are, this map is extremely misleading. A rural area with one farmer in each block will look just the s

For the purpose of assessing how densely populated places are, this map is extremely misleading. A rural area with one farmer in each block will look just the same as a city, and both will look more populated than part of a busy highway or waterway with no permanent residents. It's mixing up information about the discretization with information about the population. It reminds me of those global statistics maps that always show Alaska as having the highest GDP in the world, or most of your website visitors, or whatever just because it's lumped in with the rest of the USA. This 3D population density map is pretty nice although it seems to have larger blocks. http://undertheraedar.blogspot.com/2011/07/united-states-census-2010.html http://undertheraedar.blogspot.com/2011/07/united-states-cen...

peeters 12y ago
Is anybody suggesting this should be used for assessing population density? You seem to be attacking a straw man. The accompanying text states: > The map tends to highlight two types of areas: places where human habitation is physically restrictive or impossible, and places where human habitation is prohibited by social or legal convention. And the creator states his purpose (emphasis mine): > Ultimately, I made this map to show a different side of the United States. Human geographers spend so much time thinking about where people are. I thought I might bring some new insight by showing where they are not, adding contrast and context to the typical displays of the country’s population geography. I for one found it very interesting to see the vast expanses of the U.S. that record no permanent residences. Of particular interest to me is the administrative effort that must go into maintaining almost five million census blocks that have no citizens to report!
205guy 12y ago
Nothing in the post talks about population densities. All it talks about are census blocks with zero inhabitants. As such, the map seemed clear and clearly labeled to me.

peeters 12y ago

Is anybody suggesting this should be used for assessing population density? You seem to be attacking a straw man. The accompanying text states: > The map tends to highlight two types of areas: places where human habitation is physically restrictive or impossible, and places where human habitation is prohibited by social or legal convention. And the creator states his purpose (emphasis mine): > Ultimately, I made this map to show a different side of the United States. Human geographers spend so much time thinking about where people are. I thought I might bring some new insight by showing where they are not, adding contrast and context to the typical displays of the country’s population geography. I for one found it very interesting to see the vast expanses of the U.S. that record no permanent residences. Of particular interest to me is the administrative effort that must go into maintaining almost five million census blocks that have no citizens to report!

205guy 12y ago

Nothing in the post talks about population densities. All it talks about are census blocks with zero inhabitants. As such, the map seemed clear and clearly labeled to me.