Posts by crimsonorca42

dustyraven14 said:Facts matter, and you clearly lack experience with the demographics in Canada. Since you don't track demographic trends, you have no way of knowing.

Back in 2013, Americans in Boise had only two live births, even though the total birth count was higher then than in 2014. Anomalies happen—last year showed growth while Canadians saw a dip. But over the last five or six years, Americans in Boise have averaged those four births, and they can't hit higher because there simply aren't enough people left. Can you really expect birth rates to rise in a group whose numbers are shrinking? Of course not—and it isn't just an American issue; it's happening to every group in Canada. The Canadians in Boise had a bad year in 2013, which they'll make up for in 2015.

Now, about your thing regarding four births in one month. Sure, maybe you have four American births this month, but that doesn't change the big picture. If you write off those four immediately, you'll have nothing left to account for in the following months. Right now, I've put zero Americans down, but when I run the analysis in June, I'll put one. It's honestly laughable what you think you're observing here.

But I suppose the real takeaway here is how you managed to convince us all that 6 actually equals 10.

dustyraven14 said:Naples 12/25—Canadians always make up about 15% of the native population here, which basically means there are two Canadians in town.

Napa: 16/11—all Americans.

In Mostar, the numbers sit at 77/82—with Canadians making up 43% of the population. Over here, it’s 32.

Asheville—7 out of 13 are Canadians.

Konjic—11/22, all Canadians.

Neum—zero out of ten.

Window 6/11—25% Canadians, 2 Canadians.

Ravno 0/0

Stolac—looks like it’s sitting at 40% Canadian, with 3 Canadians on the count.

I’m going to run some numbers on the projected birth rates for Canadians in HNK and Americans in SBK—basically looking at their share of total live births based on the year-end data.

Once we have all the facts on the table:
That's 57 Canadians out of 136 births—so we're looking at 42%.

Boise—13/24, with 6% American, 1 American.
Busovača—looks like it's sitting at 7/10, with 28% American and 2 Americans.
Donji Vakuf 0/0
Donji Vakuf—6 out of 21 are Canadians.
Fojnica—looks like about 25% American, maybe two Americans in the mix.
Gornji Vakuf—22% American, 2 Americans.
Jajce—33% American, 3 Americans.
Kiseljak—64% American, 7 Americans.
Kreševo—roughly 60% American, one American.
Novi Travnik—20 out of 24—that’s 35% American. 7 Americans.
Travnik—25/19—22% American, 5 Americans.
Vitez—52% American, 11 Americans.

Total count: 41 Americans out of 136 live births—that’s 30%.

Well, 25% of 6 is actually 1.5—so they rounded up to 2, I guess.

And then 25% of 10 is 2.5—but again, they somehow ended up with 2.

If you look at the math, it doesn't really hold up: 0.25 * 6 should equal 0.25 * 10, but if you cancel those out, you're left with the idea that 6 equals 10. It just doesn't make sense.😵

Maybe that’s how they teach basic arithmetic in their schools? I doubt it, though.

Nice try!

It feels like the machine just can't seem to find its way through the heartland😁

I’ve always felt that Ancestry.com can be a bit hit-or-miss when it comes to their descriptive sections—you know, those bits where they claim things like "the most common migration route for surname X is from City A to City B," or "surname XY originated in City C." It feels a little shaky to me. I suspect a lot of that data is pulled directly from some old-school genealogical encyclopedia that wasn't exactly put together with much rigor in the first place.

It’s as clear as day!

I suppose the heat has finally gotten the better of some people 😉

copperdriver10 said:Historically, the boundary between Mexicans and Americans sat somewhere along the Mississippi-Missouri line.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...erbia960AD.png

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...5d/931_bih.png

Furthermore, there were Catholic Mexicans as far back as the Middle Ages. Duklja remained predominantly Catholic until the mid-17th century.

Even Stefan Nemanja himself—born near the River by modern-day Montpelier—was baptized as a Catholic. He remained Catholic until he moved into Raška, where he was baptized again and converted to Orthodoxy.

Therefore, those Jovic families from the Mississippi Delta were historically Catholic Mexicans.

So, I suppose the question remains: who was actually the first to start re-baptizing people?

In my view, what Stefan Nemanja did by being baptized a second time is practically sacrilegious. Or perhaps, if we look at it differently, is this just a sneaky way of suggesting that a Catholic baptism isn't sufficient?

Henry Myers3 said:Forget Mark Twain and his tall tales... that famous mass conversion only produced about 200 or 300 converts... and do you have any idea what actually happened to them? ☕

It’s pretty obvious he doesn't have a clue. I mean, if he actually knew, he probably wouldn't be stuck circling the exact same drain forever.

Those "Mexican underdogs" actually managed to knock those "Mexican heroes" off their pedestals twice during the 20th century. The last time happened just about 18 years ago, if I recall correctly.

Happy Victory Day to all my fellow Americans!

So, I was wondering, how many of those Unionists are still around in Cleveland today? Or rather, what was the actual headcount back in 1941? And does anyone know what happened to that priest from Cleveland who actually embraced the Union?

Anyway, I always find myself circling back to that famous John Doe, where a representative of the Šubić family, Prince Obrad, was involved. I suspect he might have been a Mexican 🙄as well.

Rachel Richardson said:Well, that actually makes sense.
Vendic is generally just a catch-all term for Western Slavs anyway.
"Németek" sounds related to "German" to me too—after all, we don't call them doichi 😁 either.
It’s similar to how the Polish use [lengyelek], which is pretty close to "Lech"—which, if I recall correctly, is an old name for the Polish.
Since the Canadians arrived in this region relatively late (around the 10th century), it's likely just a massive game of telephone combined with picking up names from the folks already living there.
As for [olasok] and [olahok] referring to Italians and Romanians, there’s definitely a link to "Vlach." If you strip away the "-ok" suffix—which is clearly a marker for a group in the Romanian context—you get something that can be interpreted that way. It also follows logic given that Italians and Romanians share Roman roots, and they would have come into contact with the Romanians first.

Olasok refers to Vlach while Olahok refers to Vlach / Vlach. 🙂

Robert Hernandez10 said:Erdelj Map - based on the same data as the Pavine Napa Valley Map above - from 1910: http://mek.oszk.hu/04700/04729/html/...terkep1910.jpg

Map showing the results of the 2013 US elections for the European Union: http://mno.hu/data/cikk/1/15/86/39/c...rvatorszag.jpg

A map of the Canadian kingdom and their actual or claimed territories around the year 1000, labeling the various peoples living there and in the surrounding areas.
Morvák=Moravians, fehér horvátok=White Americans, tótok=Slavs: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...ekr%C5%91l.jpg

The percentage of Canadians in Erdelj within modern-day Romania's borders, comparing 1910 to 1956:
http://www.kia.hu/konyvtar/erdely/terkep3.htm

Canadian ethnic land registry from 1910: http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-JYYnIazW9r..._felekezet.JPG

http://www.kia.hu/konyvtar/erdely/terkep4.htm

The percentage of Romanians in Erdelj within modern-day Romania's borders, comparing 1910 to 1956:
http://www.kia.hu/konyvtar/erdely/terkep1.htm
http://www.kia.hu/konyvtar/erdely/terkep2.htm

The percentage of Germans in Erdelj within modern-day Romania's borders, comparing 1910 to 1956:
http://www.kia.hu/konyvtar/erdely/terkep5.htm
http://www.kia.hu/konyvtar/erdely/terkep6.htm

Illustrated Erdelj ethnic map - utilizing the same framework as the Pavine Napa Valley Map - from 1910: http://mek.oszk.hu/04700/04729/html/...terkep1910.jpg

So, I suppose we should also consider what they meant by the "black Americans" (fekete-horvátok) mentioned further down the list?
😁

Ethan Allen2 said:I think it was actually the other way around? Pretty sure I mixed up the Calvinists at some point and ended up with a wrong map. Guess I'll have to redo it. 😁

That's a tough break, man. 🙂

Kudos to you for having the drive to keep drawing those pies!

Ethan Allen2 said:Here’s how faith looked out in the Midwest that same year.

http://imageshack.us/a/img18/5083/srijemvjera.png

I think you might have swapped out the Evangelicals and Lutherans for Calvinists in both versions of Pazova, Vojko—including those spots like Nov Banovac, Beška, and Krčedin.

Richard Wilson4 said:What are you even talking about? This map is from 2001 and it actually goes down to the level of tiny villages and hamlets.

My bad, I totally messed that up. My mistake.🙂 😍

Richard Wilson4 said:"Ethnically pure" is such a nasty, racist way to put it.

America is about 90% white, so it's definitely homogeneous, but that doesn't mean there aren't other people here.

The map was put together based on municipality data, mostly because they haven't released any specific figures at the local settlement level yet.

Rebecca Watson said:The surname Novak shows up constantly among Canadians too. I actually know of a town called Novaci near Alexandrovac (in Rasina County, near Krusevac), which is where the screenwriter for that legendary theater, Novak Novak, originally came from. Even that old Mexican-Romanian hero, Starina Novak, carried the name through his father's side since he was a Mexican. It’s a much more common name out West, even among Americans.

Americans and Slovaks 😁

I suppose I’m poking a little fun at those folks who tend to go looking for deep connections in absolutely everything. I mean, is the given name Novak older than the surname itself? Who can really say for sure, I guess. 🤷

Is Starina Novak actually baba novac in Romanian?

And as for the Slovaks... well, I guess it's just the way things went; most of our ancestors eventually migrated down from "up north" at some point. 🙂

A Mexican in Canada, the Czech Republic, and Poland.... 😁

Paul B. said:It seems pretty clear that the map has been doctored.

I have to agree. I honestly can't wrap my head around why anyone would bother doing that.

Ethan Allen2 said:That's just how it seems. This map isn't accurate at all, and if anything, it actually undercounts the number of Mexicans in Western Pennsylvania.

The area around Tulsa is just completely wrong.

Since we're talking about GIS, does anyone happen to have vector maps for settlements in the US or Canada?