The truth is out there

About 71% of the earth’s surface is covered in water according to the USGS and while humanity is working hard to increase that, and you can no doubt haggle over a few decimals, that’s a number that’s reasonably easy to confirm if you needed or wanted to do so. 

It is also a number that could be questioned if you would feel like it. Turn Google Earth the right way and 71% seems quite the underestimate:

Turn it another and there is no way it can be as high as 71%:

Now have a look at a ‘standard’ type map many of us grew up with and which are still very much in use and look similar to most maps on your phone, or maybe an alternative?

(from https://projectionwizard.org/)

No matter your point of view: Earth is what it is. 

To explain to anyone who would question earths’ areas from a flat map it is faulty easy to show that a 2D representation of a sphere’s surface requires quite some distortion. One only has to ask them to try and wrap a ball in a square piece of paper without any folds or, conversely, try to cut-up that ball in such a way it forms an unbroken square. This may have been explained to us in the early days of a geography class and few of us will ever really think about it. When than presented the right (wrong) image and a strongly worded / presented argument that there really is only 40% water cover you may have to scratch your head before having an aha moment. And this is a simple example.

A long time ago I read a sci-fi story (cannot remember which one) which included people who were trained to scrupulously report facts only. This meant that if they saw a building with white walls they would not call it a ‘white building’ unless they would have been able to observe it from all sides, otherwise it was only white ‘when viewed from …’.

Engineers of most stripes (and scientists and many others) have to have a similar approach to the facts in their daily work. To do this rigorously and consistently can be quite tiring and like with all human endeavors. it is certainly not always done flawlessly.

We also have to recognize we don’t always have all the facts in which case we have to make assumptions, extrapolate and make an ‘educated guess’ to carry on with our work. Such a guess is based on study and experience and in many cases close (enough) to the mark, and often made without too much conscious thought. If new information becomes available however we need to be able to step back and re-assess if the basis of our work is still valid or needs adjusting. I generally don’t see such a change as ‘admitting I was wrong’ but as ‘accepting new inputs’ (always assuming the earlier assumption was a sensible one) and admitting a change needs to be made.

Some decisions and views may be based on incomplete facts or are made without being fully aware of the assumptions in the (re)presentation used, but, if you are willing to have a Fox Mulder attitude: The truth is out there and it’s not just a matter of perspective.

PS. If anyone recognizes the sci-fi story and can remind me where it came from … i am really curious now.