This is true? - Geographic oddities that defy conventional wisdom

[JayhawkCO]

I don't see how any count would get you 52. I guess if they counted the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus as a) independent and b) European? Maybe something odd like Greenland, the Faeroes, or Svalbard?

Greenland wouldn't be all that odd to include, IMO.

A) It's owned by Denmark
B) It's in North America if anything

I get that.  But (A) Greenland is an autonomous country within that kingdom and has its own Prime Minister and such, and (B) Denmark is in Europe, therefore Greenland could be considered to be politically in Europe even if it isn't geographically in Europe.

I realize that the Faroe Islands also fit those criteria.  All I'm saying is that I don't think it's nuts to count Greenland as a European country.

I'd argue that Svalbard is more independent than Greenland, as it's basically owned by no country but just administered by Norway. Also, I've been there, so I'd like to count another country. 

[kphoger]

That's fine.  I'm not saying the number should be 52.  I'm just saying it wouldn't be "something odd" to count Greenland.

[JayhawkCO]

That's fine.  I'm not saying the number should be 52.  I'm just saying it wouldn't be "something odd" to count Greenland.

Sure, sure. We're on the same page.

[Dirt Roads]

That's fine.  I'm not saying the number should be 52.  I'm just saying it wouldn't be "something odd" to count Greenland.

Sure, sure. We're on the same page.

Too high.  "42 is the answer to life, the universe and everything".

[kphoger]

Too high.  "42 is the answer to life, the universe and everything".

And, if you pull tiles randomly from a Scrabble bag, you'll get the question.

[Scott5114]

It's also possible, depending on the age of the game, that the person writing the question had a completely different set of extant countries than we do now. Although I can't think of any European countries that have ceased to exist recently.

[J N Winkler]

Deep cleaning this month included dusting a Replogle relief globe that shows the DDR and USSR.

[CtrlAltDel]

I don't see how any count would get you 52. I guess if they counted the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus as a) independent and b) European? Maybe something odd like Greenland, the Faeroes, or Svalbard?

Greenland wouldn't be all that odd to include, IMO.

A) It's owned by Denmark
B) It's in North America if anything

I get that.  But (A) Greenland is an autonomous country within that kingdom and has its own Prime Minister and such, and (B) Denmark is in Europe, therefore Greenland could be considered to be politically in Europe even if it isn't geographically in Europe.

I realize that the Faroe Islands also fit those criteria.  All I'm saying is that I don't think it's nuts to count Greenland as a European country.

I'd argue that Svalbard is more independent than Greenland, as it's basically owned by no country but just administered by Norway. Also, I've been there, so I'd like to count another country. 

Svalbard is interesting. It's an integral part of the kingdom of Norway and is administered by a governor appointed by the national government. So, in that sense, it's as Norwegian as things get. On the other hand, no one needs a visa to live or work there, or to fish in the local waters, and taxes are limited by treaty. Moreover, while Norway has ratified the Schengen agreement, Svalbard is not part of the Schengen area, and also, military operations are prohbited.

So, it's definitely a unique place.

[Road Hog]

Svalbard temperatures this time of year seem to tend around 20ºF, which for their latitude seems quite pleasant. The 23 1/2 hours of darkness is another matter. I would be quite drunk there in the winter.

[skluth]

It's also possible, depending on the age of the game, that the person writing the question had a completely different set of extant countries than we do now. Although I can't think of any European countries that have ceased to exist recently.

Much to Vladimir Putin's annoyance

[Scott5114]

It's also possible, depending on the age of the game, that the person writing the question had a completely different set of extant countries than we do now. Although I can't think of any European countries that have ceased to exist recently.

Much to Vladimir Putin's annoyance

Oh, ew, I completely didn't consider the possibility that the question writer might have counted Putin's various imaginary countries (like the "DPR", "LPR", Transnistria, etc.).

[kphoger]

FWIW, a lot of the other questions in the game appear to have been written around the year 2014.

[CNGL-Leudimin]

I've noticed I-81's section in "East" Virginia is entirely West of its section in West Virginia. The same was true of US 340 before it was realigned around Harpers Ferry.

[bwana39]

Blytheville, AR is closer to Evansville, IN (251.3 miles) than it is to Texarkana, AR (370.8 miles).

And Texarkana at one time traveled to Blytheville in the state football playoffs.

Blytheville is closer to the nearest point in Missouri, Kansas, Oklahoma, Iowa, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Tennessee, Mississippi, Alabama,Georgia, and Louisiana than it is to Texas (Texarkana AR is on the state line.) So 12 states are closer than Texarkana. North Carolina is only around 30 miles farther.

[J N Winkler]

I'm not sure this has already been mentioned, but I discovered just now that a part of New Hampshire is due north of Vermont at the Canadian border near Beecher Falls, Vermont.  This occurs because while the border between the two states is the Connecticut River, the international boundary (Québec-NH at this point) follows a tributary just to the west, which leaves Vermont with a triangle of land whose northern boundary is an extension of the Canadian border east to the Connecticut River (nominally the 45th Parallel, but the 18th-century surveys were not accurate).

[bwana39]

It's also possible, depending on the age of the game, that the person writing the question had a completely different set of extant countries than we do now. Although I can't think of any European countries that have ceased to exist recently.

Much to Vladimir Putin's annoyance

Oh, ew, I completely didn't consider the possibility that the question writer might have counted Putin's various imaginary countries (like the "DPR", "LPR", Transnistria, etc.).

My kid was in middle school in the mid-90's. The textbook was a little older. The teacher was still teaching about the Soviet Union which was 5 years dissolved by that point.

[kphoger]

My kid was in middle school in the mid-90's. The textbook was a little older. The teacher was still teaching about the Soviet Union which was 5 years dissolved by that point.

Well, I should hope teachers haven't stopped teaching about the Soviet Union.   

[Scott5114]

My kid was in middle school in the mid-90's. The textbook was a little older. The teacher was still teaching about the Soviet Union which was 5 years dissolved by that point.

Well, I should hope teachers haven't stopped teaching about the Soviet Union.   

In Oklahoma, they never started–the curriculum didn't cover events that recent.

[Rothman]

My kid was in middle school in the mid-90's. The textbook was a little older. The teacher was still teaching about the Soviet Union which was 5 years dissolved by that point.

Well, I should hope teachers haven't stopped teaching about the Soviet Union.   

In Oklahoma, they never started–the curriculum didn't cover events that recent.

That's disturbing, since that was almost the way it was when I graduated from high school about 30 years ago.

My kids' classes in NY covered much more recent events, however.

[webny99]

I'm not sure this has already been mentioned, but I discovered just now that a part of New Hampshire is due north of Vermont at the Canadian border near Beecher Falls, Vermont.  This occurs because while the border between the two states is the Connecticut River, the international boundary (Québec-NH at this point) follows a tributary just to the west, which leaves Vermont with a triangle of land whose northern boundary is an extension of the Canadian border east to the Connecticut River (nominally the 45th Parallel, but the 18th-century surveys were not accurate).

I had never noticed this before either. It is odd that this triangle of land belongs to Vermont and not New Hampshire.

[Poiponen13]

I'm not sure this has already been mentioned, but I discovered just now that a part of New Hampshire is due north of Vermont at the Canadian border near Beecher Falls, Vermont.  This occurs because while the border between the two states is the Connecticut River, the international boundary (Québec-NH at this point) follows a tributary just to the west, which leaves Vermont with a triangle of land whose northern boundary is an extension of the Canadian border east to the Connecticut River (nominally the 45th Parallel, but the 18th-century surveys were not accurate).

I had never noticed this before either. It is odd that this triangle of land belongs to Vermont and not New Hampshire.

It should then be transferred to New Hampshire.

[MATraveler128]

I'm not sure this has already been mentioned, but I discovered just now that a part of New Hampshire is due north of Vermont at the Canadian border near Beecher Falls, Vermont.  This occurs because while the border between the two states is the Connecticut River, the international boundary (Québec-NH at this point) follows a tributary just to the west, which leaves Vermont with a triangle of land whose northern boundary is an extension of the Canadian border east to the Connecticut River (nominally the 45th Parallel, but the 18th-century surveys were not accurate).

I had never noticed this before either. It is odd that this triangle of land belongs to Vermont and not New Hampshire.

It should then be transferred to New Hampshire.

What would be the point in that? No one lives in that little nub of Vermont anyway.

[kphoger]

I'm not sure this has already been mentioned, but I discovered just now that a part of New Hampshire is due north of Vermont at the Canadian border near Beecher Falls, Vermont.  This occurs because while the border between the two states is the Connecticut River, the international boundary (Québec-NH at this point) follows a tributary just to the west, which leaves Vermont with a triangle of land whose northern boundary is an extension of the Canadian border east to the Connecticut River (nominally the 45th Parallel, but the 18th-century surveys were not accurate).

I had never noticed this before either. It is odd that this triangle of land belongs to Vermont and not New Hampshire.

It should then be transferred to New Hampshire.

Nah.  Each boundary follows a river.  It's fine the way it is.  If that small triangle were part of New Hampshire, then the very few people who live there would be further isolated from the nearest community in their state.

[Scott5114]

My kid was in middle school in the mid-90's. The textbook was a little older. The teacher was still teaching about the Soviet Union which was 5 years dissolved by that point.

Well, I should hope teachers haven't stopped teaching about the Soviet Union.   

In Oklahoma, they never started–the curriculum didn't cover events that recent.

That's disturbing, since that was almost the way it was when I graduated from high school about 30 years ago.

My kids' classes in NY covered much more recent events, however.

The most recent event the history curriculum covered was Reconstruction, because every year history began at the American Revolution and by the time we got done with the Civil War the school year was about out.

The most recent event that we were actually taught was the Kennedy assassination, simply because the teacher enjoyed teaching it. It wasn't on the state standardized test.

[hotdogPi]

In my school, 10th and 11th grade were split so that 1877 (end of Reconstruction) was the cutoff point between grades and the two grades covered everything, but since I took AP in 11th, the earlier stuff got covered twice.

history began at the American Revolution

Massachusetts definitely doesn't have the issue where things before the American Revolution were skipped. Part of this could be because my current location was settled around 1640, and back two more decades closer to the coast, meaning that local history would be skipped if we started in the late 1700s.