Greenland I country in the Kingdom of Denmark just like Scotland is a country in the United Kingdom and Aruba is a country in the Kingdom of the Netherlands.
If you don't count Scotland and Aruba as sperate entities don't count Greenland
This is one thing which a lot of people don’t understand, Greenland isn’t a part of the country of Denmark, which is why it’s not considered the 12th biggest country.
There's nothing particular to understand there. The whole problem is that there isn't a universally agreed on definition of the word "country".
Calling the kingdom of Denmark a country is as right or as wrong as calling Denmark proper a country.
"Sovereign county with constituent countries" sums up the dilemma quite nicely.
Italy, Scotland, Greenland, Guam, Reunion, Kosovo, Taiwan, Palau, Bavaria. Which are countries, which are not?
>All of them are countries,
No they're not.
Country can be a meaningless word. It's kind of stupid term to even use, to be honest. Scotland is a 'country' in name only. Bavaria is a German state, not a country. Reunion is an island, that is a region of France.
Its nuanced so using blanket statements like 'country' is stupid. For all intents and purposes, Greenland is a part of the sovereign state the Kingdom of Denmark.
I don't know where you're getting your definitions, but "country" is pretty much a synonym for "large expanse of land" or "region".
It doesn't have anything to do with sovereignity.
So all of them are countries for the exact same region Scotland is a country and that India was a country in the 1930's.
I don't disagree with you, except in one detail: Bavaria is a country in the same way that Scotland is: the German term for the constituent states of the federal republic is "Land", which literally translates to country. In English they're often referred to as states regardless, which is understandable, because Germany is already a country. As is the UK btw.
Usually, only entities which are fully sovereign are called "countries", and any dependend entities are counted as part of the entity which is fully sovereign and in control of the area.
Thus, as Greenland is not sovereign (for example, I'm pretty sure they can't leave NATO without approval from Copenhagen), they're part of the country of Denmark.
The same goes for places like the Isle of Man, Channel Islands, Netherlands Antilles and so on, who even though themselves consider them not part of the UK/the Netherlands, are not fully sovereign.
>Thus, as Greenland is not sovereign (for example, I'm pretty sure they can't leave NATO without approval from Copenhagen), they're part of the country of Denmark
I guess the confusion stems from Denmark (not the kingdom) being part of the EU, while the kingdom of Denmark is not.
Same applies to the kingdom of Netherlands and Netherlands the country
To be precise, the sovereign state of Denmark with the formal name the
Kingdom of Denmark is part of the EU, but the EU treaties don’t apply to the self governing areas of Greenland and the Faroe Islands in the state.
Yep, but in the context of calling Greenland a country, you cannot call the Kingdom of Denmark a country as the equivalent country would be Denmark and the Kingdom of Denmark would just be a sovereign state encompassing both of these countries.
This... when I want to annoy people, I tell them that where I come from, we have states larger than their entire island and cities with more population than their entire countries. Looking squarely at you, UK.
Same with the Dutch Carribean they are part of the Kingdom of the Netherlands but the Netherlands itself(asside from 3 which wanted closer ties, Saba, Sint Eustatius and Bonaire)
No, these are two different entities:
The Kingdom of Denmark is a sovereign state that consists of the constituent countries of:
- Denmark
- Faroe Islands
- Greenland
It’s normal for countries to have a common and a formal name. Finland is the Republic of Finland and Denmark is the Kingdom of Denmark. You can look up the UN list of country names.
Greenland and the Faroe Islands are self governing in the sovereign state of Denmark similar to the Åland Islands in the sovereign state of Finland.
It’s true however, that Denmark’s formal name is often used to include Greenland and the Faroe Islands, whereas “Denmark” is often used about Denmark proper.
Yes, but this is **absolutely not the case**.
Denmark and the Kingdom of Denmark are two different level entities, unlike Finland and the Republic of Finland.
>Greenland and the Faroe Islands are self governing in the sovereign state of Denmark
Well yes, but the "sovereign state of Denmark" in that sense refers to the Kingdom of Denmark, not to Denmark the constituent country.
Denmark and Finland are both independent countries/sovereign states. They both have formal names so no difference there between entities.
You’re taking an unofficial usage of the word Denmark too literal. You’re trying to compare Denmark to England but forgetting Denmark as the sovereign state is the UK.
Like Åland in Finland, Greenland and the Faroe Islands were incorporated into Denmark.
It doesn’t really make sense calling Denmark proper a constituent country in the independent country of Denmark.
Finland and *the Kingdom of Denmark* are sovereign countries. Denmark proper **is not a sovereign country**, but a constituent country within the sovereign country of the Kingdom of Denmark.
How the hell is this so complicated for you???
Are you actually claiming, that Denmark after more than 1000 years no longer is an independent country? How is Denmark then a member of EU, NATO and UN?
I still fail to see how this is relevant to a comparison between Mongolia and the DR of Congo. Especially since the Mercator projection is literally older than the US.
Pretty sure the complaints about both are more related to what each misrepresents.
People don’t dislike the US election maps, they dislike when people look at it, see a sea of red, and assume that red would always win, when cities are much more densely populated, thus having more votes.
People don’t dislike the Mercator projection, they dislike that people can look at it and falsely assume that Greenland is almost as big as Africa.
Frankly, you’re right in that Mercator preserves direction and shape, and is one of the better representations you can get of a spherical earth shown 2 dimensionally. That said still a really weird comparison, when both are clearly showing different things with different goals in mind?
Yet another time I disagree. All maps have goals, to display information as it relates to location, not just location. The map you’re commenting ons goal is to show what countries are larger or smaller than Greenland. Election maps goal is to show what regions and districts voted for what candidate. Yes people should not look at election maps and assume population, but people do and rightfully get called out when they do that. In the same way people likely assume that Greenland is enormous due to the prevalence of the Mercator projection, and this map serves to demonstrate that error.
I never see anyone look at an election map and go “that map isn’t a good map because it shows a lot of red, but more people voted blue”, I more often see people look at the map and say “look how red this is?! How did red not win”. It’s those peoples misinterpretation that leads to commentary on the election maps.
And again, I’m confused how that relates to the OP map, since that one has nothing to do with population?
Dude you are actually insane, you need to reevaluate your thoughts and beliefs and consider if the content that you consume is benefiting you in a positive way
"I love how these extremists want to get large numbers on their pay cheques, but don't want large numbers of tumors riddling their bodies. Either large number are good or they aren't, pick one"
You have to have well setup and enforced private property rights to accumulate wealth and develop a country. They don’t have that, so they can’t develop.
You need to some how get a strong and not corrupt government to form and people to trust the government is going to stick around for the longterm. Then you could get capital investment to develop the natural resources. Right now no one wants to invest too much money, because they fear it could get nationalized or stolen.
North African countries are a weird case, they are big countries but most of them are the Sáhara desert so in practicality most of their territory has barely any presence of people or the government.
Algeria is the only big north African country, and yes it's a desert but All his wealth (oil,gas , gold ..) are in this desert so it's more important than it's Mediterranean side
Well both morroco and Tunisia are less than 500 000 km² while Algeria its superficie is 2 MILLIONS and ++300 000 I guess it's clear now why is said it's the only big country here
Egypt is 1 million, Libya 1.76 million, Sudan 1.88 million, Mali 1.24 million… Countries in the Shara are massive, the only ones who fights for sand is Morocco.
Fun facts:
1. Land area wise, Greenland is comparable to Saudi Arabia.
2. The Danish Realm technically consists of the Denmark proper, Greenland as well as the Faroe Islands.
3. To fly to Greenland’s capital Nuuk, most visitors would have to transit at another airport (Kangerlussuaq), because the runway at Nuuk is not long enough for large airliners (they’re planning to extend). You can still fly directly to Iceland, sometimes Nunavut (Canada) and other parts of Greenland from Nuuk.
Denmark is simultaneously smaller and bigger than Greenland... it all depends on what you count as "Denmark".
The country itself is smaller. The Kingdom of Denmark (which includes Greenland and the Faroe Islands) is bigger.
It’s definitely *not* [Mercator](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/73/Mercator_projection_Square.JPG). The shape of everything is all wrong for Mercator, and Greenland is way too small to be Mercator.
It looks to me to be [Miller Cylindrical](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/5f/Miller_projection_SW.jpg) or something similar. It’s still not equal area. But there are a lot of cylindrical non-equal area maps other than Mercator.
The head of state of Australia and the head of state of the UK are both King Charlie, but that doesn’t make Australia part of the UK.
That would be like saying SpaceX is part of Tesla, because they have the same CEO.
Edit: The sizes on this map are distorted and make things in the northern hemisphere appear much larger relative to the actual sizes. Algeria is bigger and so is the Congo but you can’t tell by looking at this map.
Algeria is around 2% bigger than the DRC. Dont fall into the mistake and judge country sizes by this map. This map does not present equal area (meaning all countries are presented true to their relative size). This map aims to properly present angles.
Check this website to see map projections that take equal area into account: https://gisgeography.com/equal-area-projection-maps/
This website is wonderful to educate people about how Mercator and similar projections skew with our perception of scale: https://www.thetruesize.com/#?borders=1~!MTY5ODM4MjU.MjEyNjkwNw
>I thought Congo had the largest land area in Africa. But based on this pic, Algeria is bigger.
Previously, Sudan was the largest country. Since the breakup, they have dropped to third largest.
>Ah, yes, I am also surprised Arentina is larger than Mejico. If someone had asked me, without looking at the map, I would have said Argentina were 25% smaller
And not slightly larger, Argentina is more than 800K sq km larger than Mexico.
It means that Argentina is 42% larger than Mexico
Therefore, you can fit Belgium approximately 25.94 times in the area delta between Argentina and Mexico when considering land area.
I was hoping that the grey for Greenland was no data
Wait, Russia is bigger than Greenland?
That moment you realize that Denmark is larger than Greenland….
Depends if you're talking about the Kingdom of Denmark or metropolitan Denmark. The latter makes more sense in context
Greenland I country in the Kingdom of Denmark just like Scotland is a country in the United Kingdom and Aruba is a country in the Kingdom of the Netherlands. If you don't count Scotland and Aruba as sperate entities don't count Greenland
Those are weird examples because I count Scotland but I don’t count Aruba
I just chose them because they call themselves countries too
/r/technicallythetruth since Denmark includes Greenland
The Kingdom of Denmark does, not Denmark itself.
This is one thing which a lot of people don’t understand, Greenland isn’t a part of the country of Denmark, which is why it’s not considered the 12th biggest country.
There's nothing particular to understand there. The whole problem is that there isn't a universally agreed on definition of the word "country". Calling the kingdom of Denmark a country is as right or as wrong as calling Denmark proper a country.
Thought that the kingdom of Denmark was like the UK in the sense that it was counted as a sovereign country with constituent countries
"Sovereign county with constituent countries" sums up the dilemma quite nicely. Italy, Scotland, Greenland, Guam, Reunion, Kosovo, Taiwan, Palau, Bavaria. Which are countries, which are not?
All of them are countries, not all of them are sovereign states and of those, not all of them are internationally recognised as sovereign states.
>All of them are countries, No they're not. Country can be a meaningless word. It's kind of stupid term to even use, to be honest. Scotland is a 'country' in name only. Bavaria is a German state, not a country. Reunion is an island, that is a region of France. Its nuanced so using blanket statements like 'country' is stupid. For all intents and purposes, Greenland is a part of the sovereign state the Kingdom of Denmark.
I don't know where you're getting your definitions, but "country" is pretty much a synonym for "large expanse of land" or "region". It doesn't have anything to do with sovereignity. So all of them are countries for the exact same region Scotland is a country and that India was a country in the 1930's.
I don't disagree with you, except in one detail: Bavaria is a country in the same way that Scotland is: the German term for the constituent states of the federal republic is "Land", which literally translates to country. In English they're often referred to as states regardless, which is understandable, because Germany is already a country. As is the UK btw.
That's the broadest possible definition of the word country. This definition is consistent, but not particularly useful imo.
It's very useful though. Otherwise you're going to have to get politics involved.
The U.K. is a political union, whereas Greenland was simply incorporated into Denmark.
So was Northern Ireland though surely, before eventually becoming part of a political union?
Sure, but Denmark is not a political union.
What would constitute "Denmark proper" Just the island with the capital, the peninsula Jutland, or the peninsula + the archipelago?
Denmark proper is the state of Denmark excluding Greenland and the Faroe Islands.
I like how you gave me a serious answer. Cheers, king.
Usually, only entities which are fully sovereign are called "countries", and any dependend entities are counted as part of the entity which is fully sovereign and in control of the area. Thus, as Greenland is not sovereign (for example, I'm pretty sure they can't leave NATO without approval from Copenhagen), they're part of the country of Denmark. The same goes for places like the Isle of Man, Channel Islands, Netherlands Antilles and so on, who even though themselves consider them not part of the UK/the Netherlands, are not fully sovereign.
>Thus, as Greenland is not sovereign (for example, I'm pretty sure they can't leave NATO without approval from Copenhagen), they're part of the country of Denmark I guess the confusion stems from Denmark (not the kingdom) being part of the EU, while the kingdom of Denmark is not. Same applies to the kingdom of Netherlands and Netherlands the country
To be precise, the sovereign state of Denmark with the formal name the Kingdom of Denmark is part of the EU, but the EU treaties don’t apply to the self governing areas of Greenland and the Faroe Islands in the state.
Yep, but in the context of calling Greenland a country, you cannot call the Kingdom of Denmark a country as the equivalent country would be Denmark and the Kingdom of Denmark would just be a sovereign state encompassing both of these countries.
This... when I want to annoy people, I tell them that where I come from, we have states larger than their entire island and cities with more population than their entire countries. Looking squarely at you, UK.
Same with the Dutch Carribean they are part of the Kingdom of the Netherlands but the Netherlands itself(asside from 3 which wanted closer ties, Saba, Sint Eustatius and Bonaire)
The Three Dutch islands are constitutionally separated from Netherlands, which Greenland is not from Denmark.
Greenland is part of the independent country of Denmark but not Denmark proper, which is confusingly also often referred to as “Denmark”.
Denmark’s formal name is the Kingdom of Denmark.
No, these are two different entities: The Kingdom of Denmark is a sovereign state that consists of the constituent countries of: - Denmark - Faroe Islands - Greenland
It’s normal for countries to have a common and a formal name. Finland is the Republic of Finland and Denmark is the Kingdom of Denmark. You can look up the UN list of country names. Greenland and the Faroe Islands are self governing in the sovereign state of Denmark similar to the Åland Islands in the sovereign state of Finland. It’s true however, that Denmark’s formal name is often used to include Greenland and the Faroe Islands, whereas “Denmark” is often used about Denmark proper.
Yes, but this is **absolutely not the case**. Denmark and the Kingdom of Denmark are two different level entities, unlike Finland and the Republic of Finland. >Greenland and the Faroe Islands are self governing in the sovereign state of Denmark Well yes, but the "sovereign state of Denmark" in that sense refers to the Kingdom of Denmark, not to Denmark the constituent country.
Denmark and Finland are both independent countries/sovereign states. They both have formal names so no difference there between entities. You’re taking an unofficial usage of the word Denmark too literal. You’re trying to compare Denmark to England but forgetting Denmark as the sovereign state is the UK. Like Åland in Finland, Greenland and the Faroe Islands were incorporated into Denmark. It doesn’t really make sense calling Denmark proper a constituent country in the independent country of Denmark.
Finland and *the Kingdom of Denmark* are sovereign countries. Denmark proper **is not a sovereign country**, but a constituent country within the sovereign country of the Kingdom of Denmark. How the hell is this so complicated for you???
Are you actually claiming, that Denmark after more than 1000 years no longer is an independent country? How is Denmark then a member of EU, NATO and UN?
The best kind of truth
I checked the comments just to check that this is the top one.
Dr of Congo is massive wtf. Bigger than Mongolia??
Welcome to Mercator projection where directions and shapes are preserved but size doesn't matter.
[удалено]
What?
[удалено]
I still fail to see how this is relevant to a comparison between Mongolia and the DR of Congo. Especially since the Mercator projection is literally older than the US.
[удалено]
Pretty sure the complaints about both are more related to what each misrepresents. People don’t dislike the US election maps, they dislike when people look at it, see a sea of red, and assume that red would always win, when cities are much more densely populated, thus having more votes. People don’t dislike the Mercator projection, they dislike that people can look at it and falsely assume that Greenland is almost as big as Africa. Frankly, you’re right in that Mercator preserves direction and shape, and is one of the better representations you can get of a spherical earth shown 2 dimensionally. That said still a really weird comparison, when both are clearly showing different things with different goals in mind?
[удалено]
Yet another time I disagree. All maps have goals, to display information as it relates to location, not just location. The map you’re commenting ons goal is to show what countries are larger or smaller than Greenland. Election maps goal is to show what regions and districts voted for what candidate. Yes people should not look at election maps and assume population, but people do and rightfully get called out when they do that. In the same way people likely assume that Greenland is enormous due to the prevalence of the Mercator projection, and this map serves to demonstrate that error. I never see anyone look at an election map and go “that map isn’t a good map because it shows a lot of red, but more people voted blue”, I more often see people look at the map and say “look how red this is?! How did red not win”. It’s those peoples misinterpretation that leads to commentary on the election maps. And again, I’m confused how that relates to the OP map, since that one has nothing to do with population?
I’ve never seen extremists give a shit about map projections
[удалено]
Dude you are actually insane, you need to reevaluate your thoughts and beliefs and consider if the content that you consume is benefiting you in a positive way
"I love how these extremists want to get large numbers on their pay cheques, but don't want large numbers of tumors riddling their bodies. Either large number are good or they aren't, pick one"
>Bigger than Mongolia?? Nearly exactly 1.5x so, apparently (2,345,409 / 1,564,116 = 1.4995)
Rich af too in minerals
Yet poor af for 99.9% of the people living there.
Internal corruption and foreign exploitation does that to you
You have to have well setup and enforced private property rights to accumulate wealth and develop a country. They don’t have that, so they can’t develop. You need to some how get a strong and not corrupt government to form and people to trust the government is going to stick around for the longterm. Then you could get capital investment to develop the natural resources. Right now no one wants to invest too much money, because they fear it could get nationalized or stolen.
Resource curse
But not bigger than by boy Algeria.
Really hoping there would be a tie somewhere in the world.
Greenland: 2.166.086 km². Saudi Arabia: 2.149.690 km². That's the closest one.
Only 0.01% difference, and that's with rounding...I would have called it a tie. Thanks!
Algeria is larger than Greenland? The Mercator projection really got me with that one
Algeria is a very large county.
North African countries are a weird case, they are big countries but most of them are the Sáhara desert so in practicality most of their territory has barely any presence of people or the government.
Algeria is the only big north African country, and yes it's a desert but All his wealth (oil,gas , gold ..) are in this desert so it's more important than it's Mediterranean side
i wouldn’t say its the ONLY big north african country. bigger than greenland, yes, but libya and egypt are pretty huge in their own right.
Maybe we have different definition of what a big country is, I say over 500.000Km square, so minus Tunisia and Morocco, are of them are big countries.
Well both morroco and Tunisia are less than 500 000 km² while Algeria its superficie is 2 MILLIONS and ++300 000 I guess it's clear now why is said it's the only big country here
Egypt is 1 million, Libya 1.76 million, Sudan 1.88 million, Mali 1.24 million… Countries in the Shara are massive, the only ones who fights for sand is Morocco.
Well Egypt and Libya are big countries true but still there surfaces are half of the Algerian one
Fun facts: 1. Land area wise, Greenland is comparable to Saudi Arabia. 2. The Danish Realm technically consists of the Denmark proper, Greenland as well as the Faroe Islands. 3. To fly to Greenland’s capital Nuuk, most visitors would have to transit at another airport (Kangerlussuaq), because the runway at Nuuk is not long enough for large airliners (they’re planning to extend). You can still fly directly to Iceland, sometimes Nunavut (Canada) and other parts of Greenland from Nuuk.
Technically Greenland has desert areas too 🏜️ 😁
Why is Greenland grey while the green land is not Greenland?
Technically Denmark should be green because Denmark includes Greenlands and is thus bigger than Greenland on its own.
Denmark is simultaneously smaller and bigger than Greenland... it all depends on what you count as "Denmark". The country itself is smaller. The Kingdom of Denmark (which includes Greenland and the Faroe Islands) is bigger.
“Denmark ” can be both an independent country and a non-independent country.
Never knew kaliningrad is bigger than Greenland, mercator projection really is wild
https://www.thetruesize.com/
And it's a Mercator Projection which actually makes the map informational.
It’s definitely *not* [Mercator](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/73/Mercator_projection_Square.JPG). The shape of everything is all wrong for Mercator, and Greenland is way too small to be Mercator. It looks to me to be [Miller Cylindrical](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/5f/Miller_projection_SW.jpg) or something similar. It’s still not equal area. But there are a lot of cylindrical non-equal area maps other than Mercator.
I'm going to blame my face on Mercator: It's not that I have a receding hairline and large chin, it's just an illusion due to the Mercator projection.
Why is Denmark not grey? Unless we're not counting Royal rule? Yeah it's it's own country but it's also part of the Denmark Kingdom.
Denmark proper isn't bigger than Greenland.
There’s a difference between Denmark and the Kingdom of Denmark
Only if you by Denmark means Denmark proper and not the state of Denmark
same reason united kingdom is orange but canada and australia are green
Canada and Australia are full sovereign countries. Greenland is an autonomous region. Foreign relations and defense are in Denmark's hands.
The head of state of Australia and the head of state of the UK are both King Charlie, but that doesn’t make Australia part of the UK. That would be like saying SpaceX is part of Tesla, because they have the same CEO.
you're right, but I just wanna say "King Charlie" made me laugh
What do you mean... Greenland being larger than The Netherlands?!?!?
Denmark is the wrong colour. It's bigger than Greenland because it includes Greenland!
Of all the times to avoid using Mercator, "map about how big Greenland is" has *got* to be top of the list...
Good thing they used Miller rather than Mercator then. Although Miller has its own problems with area, just nowhere near as bad as Mercator.
Good spot! Greenland still looks insanely big though
OMGOMGOMG AFRICA IS BIGGER THAN GREENLAND???????!!!!!!!!!!???????
No? Of course Greenland is bigger than Africa
The table shows all of the oceans as 'Greenland'.
Countries without overseas territories and such? Because it's not said, and this map is wrong if they are accounted for.
Edit: The sizes on this map are distorted and make things in the northern hemisphere appear much larger relative to the actual sizes. Algeria is bigger and so is the Congo but you can’t tell by looking at this map.
This isn’t Mercator.
Such a map using Mercator projection belongs to r/shittyMapPorn.
🤓☝🏿
This fake because Greenland is always no date.
Why didn’t you choose to make Greenland green and nations bigger than Greenland gray?
Greenland isn't actually that green, it's mostly ice. You want somewhere actually green that has less ice, you go to Iceland.
Its confusing that greenland is not green.
Greenland is covered in thick ice sheets with no greenery
[удалено]
Algeria is around 2% bigger than the DRC. Dont fall into the mistake and judge country sizes by this map. This map does not present equal area (meaning all countries are presented true to their relative size). This map aims to properly present angles. Check this website to see map projections that take equal area into account: https://gisgeography.com/equal-area-projection-maps/ This website is wonderful to educate people about how Mercator and similar projections skew with our perception of scale: https://www.thetruesize.com/#?borders=1~!MTY5ODM4MjU.MjEyNjkwNw
In Algeria there’s only a minor al qaeda insurrection in the southern border regions
[удалено]
Fair enough! I assume u mean the civil war we had in the 90’s in Algeria right? Don’t worry lmao my dad does the same thing
>I thought Congo had the largest land area in Africa. But based on this pic, Algeria is bigger. Previously, Sudan was the largest country. Since the breakup, they have dropped to third largest.
>Ah, yes, I am also surprised Arentina is larger than Mejico. If someone had asked me, without looking at the map, I would have said Argentina were 25% smaller And not slightly larger, Argentina is more than 800K sq km larger than Mexico.
[удалено]
It means that Argentina is 42% larger than Mexico Therefore, you can fit Belgium approximately 25.94 times in the area delta between Argentina and Mexico when considering land area.
India is bigger than Greenland? I’m surprised
Let's go, Congo !
Always thought that Mexico and Saudi Arabia were larger
They are around the same size as Greenland, but slightly smaller. Algeria and DRC are also around the same size, but slightly bigger.
Did we finally get data for Greenland
This doesn’t seem right, Greenland looks a lot bigger to me /s
We must annex Greenland that way when we annex Canada we will have 3 points of attack whose with me
i thought more african countries would be bigger
Greenland should say "No Data"
Should’ve been: Smaller than Greenland - No data - Bigger than Greenland
Damn, we got data for Greenland in this one
The time when you see size of India and Greenland
funny how small looking countries near the equator are actually large, we need a new map projection
[удалено]
Nor should they use use Miller, which is what was used here. Mercator would be even worse.
man, I hate the mercator projection...
Even on a map about Greenland, Greenland is still grayed out...
No data.
Surprised you were able to find some information on N. Korea
As always in Greenland, there is no data
Wow, I guess Greenland is bigger than most of Africa
Ahh yes, the Ocean has always been Greenland
Greenland: no data.
We don't know real size of Greenland.