Interesting data, but I don’t think it is beautifully presented. Bar charts, or maybe a blown up pie charts may be easier to grasp the scale.
Blobs of the largely same color, dispersed in a random pattern make it hard to quickly see scale
I'm sure this has zero side effects...
It'll probably be mostly rodents in 200 years.
A bit confusing. Normal circumferences or a bar graph would be much more informative and easier to compare.
What sucks is that wild animals used to be everywhere! You could walk into a forest and easily see dozens of animals. But most of them have been killed off from over hunting in the 19th century and environment encroachment.
Also, in a lot of places it has become really hard to find the thing that was considered a forest a few hundred years ago. All we have now in Germany are spruce or pine plantations where the only animals you can find are ants.
You guys don't have forest land anymore? That is an absolute tragedy! I'm really sorry to hear that for you guys. I have to get to the wilderness at least once every couple of months or I lose my mind. I get super stressed out, claustrophobic, and depressed. Spending a weekend in the wilderness is a much needed reset. Thank goodness for Teddy Roosevelt's National Park programs and general land conservation efforts here in the US.
We have a few national parks, but they're not nearly as big or as old as the ones in the US. And there are no more native forests, every one of them has been man made at some point. Within national parks and some other areas, they're trying to let nature take over again but it's a slow process. In one national park (Harz) they've stopped trying to save the spruce trees that were never supposed to be there, and they're all dying from drought, climate change and bark beetles:
https://assets.deutschlandfunk.de/403b1645-9795-4a2c-ad31-43f00c903cb5/1920x1080.jpg
I'm sure something better adapted to the conditions will come in after the spruce is gone, but it's a work in progress.
Teddy Roosevelt's National Park programs
Imagine the uproar if that was a new idea now. People would hate it as the most "socialist", anti-business, outlandish concept. You just conserve it? And you can't build strip mall parking lots and gas stations all over it?!?
This is good, but presenting the blobs as such different shapes makes it harder to get a sense of relative size. (Obviously some of the differences are huge enough it doesn't matter, but comparing humans and cattle say.)
And which blob is chickens? I guess chickens are so much smaller and lighter than other domestic animals they don't show very big here.
Cool, thanks! I'd love to see this format with pets and livestock broken down.
Another suggestion would be to not include the number of blocks in the label. That doesn’t make sense. If you want an absolute number to be included, but the weight (scaled to millions of tons appropriately). It is less abstract than number of blocks.
Also, this is more subjective, but the font makes it look very amateur in my opinion.
It's specifically a visualization of land mammals, so chickens wouldn't appear, being birds.
Fair enough, but in a way chickens kinda should be on there anyways. They can't exactly fly very far, spend like 98% of their life on the ground, and humans breed them for food.
I think the argument was chickens not being mammals.
Ah, indeed. Still seems they should have been a bit more broad than restricting the data to land mammals, more like humans vs food.
Oh well, it is what it is.
They don't spend 98% of their life on the ground in the wild. They sleep in trees, just like turkeys and peacocks.
90%+ chickens are bred for food, I don't think there's all that many truly wild chickens out there anymore.
There are probably some somewhere, but yeah not many. However the ones that are bred for food typically weigh more.
Hell, if you let a meat chicken grow beyond its sell-by date, there's a good chance it will develop so much muscle mass it cannot stand up anymore, and it will rot to death on the spot.
I'm pretty sure they were domesticated from something (a South Asian jungle fowl, I believe) to the extent that they are no longer even the same species. So any "wild" chickens would just be feral escapees.
Clearly we should be eating more burgers, not less...
Brave talk from someone who is outnumbered and surrounded
Never been on a farm have ya? Yes cows/bulls are big, but they don't eat meat. They'll sure stomp you to death if you don't respect them though.
I grew up on a horse farm. Just play them a little music and talk nice to them, they're usually pretty chill.
Then the farmers just breed more cattle and the total CO2 impact and animal suffering just keeps rising, I.E. exactly what's happened in the last few decades since meat went from a luxury to being perceived as a human right.
Then eat even more cattle until we eat faster than they can breed them. Eventually we should be able to thin the herd if we work together! 🍔
What you want from me? I'm just brainfarting here.
It annoys me that I can't see what all the other ones represent. I need to know which is dogs and cats dammit!
Seriously. I'd also like to know domestic vs feral.
Seriously nobody is gonna link the source? https://xkcd.com/1338/
Wow, that terrible thing is from XKCD?
Does this type of illustration exist with a comparison between humans and various insects? I think that would be really interesting.
The fact that the wild animals aren't labeled but are broken up makes me extremely confused. Also what are all the unlabeled pets blocks supposed to be?
Oh dear.
A place to share and discuss data visualizations. #dataviz
(under new moderation as of 2024-01, please let me know if there are any changes you want to see!)
