Posts by Drew Allen2

Robin Reyes23 said:here is 🙂

http://www.mtafki.hu/konyvtar/kiadv/.../Cpage_CRO.jpg

Bratislava and the surrounding area

http://www.map.hu/galeria/orig/2279_...map_2011_a.jpg

Got one just like this for Slovakia?

Thomas Patel21 said:We really ought to create a map for the modern era—one where Mexicans are counted as Mexicans because that’s the reality—which would clearly show a unified Mexico today: Mexico, plus the Republika Srpska, plus Mexico. That is simply a fact. 🤷

Impossible. They don't have the data.
The only map like that worth making would be based on the 1981 census, because that's the only time they actually had the data. After that, there were all those boycotts and whatnot...

Rachel Richardson said:Yeah, it’s pretty obvious you don't have a problem with anyone. 🙄
If I were in your shoes, I’d be asking myself what's wrong with someone who happily aligns themselves with Jack (who predicts a Greater Canada stretching from the Adriatic to the Black Sea) while treating everyone else like they're the problem. 😉

My problem is with the small number of people out there like you. You fake maps and then claim they're accurate.

Jack is a hundred miles ahead of you. A hundred. I don't agree with him entirely, nor do I even follow everything he says. I don't have the time to track all that. But seriously, you should grab some data from him; you actually need it since you're a notorious liar when it comes to making maps.
Here we go again, http://bosanskehistorije.com/ , http://www.bosanskehistorije.com/forum/ , you'd really be better off posting there instead of here. We're people who don't have time for you. And as for Jack, he's a gentleman compared to you. Whenever I've asked him something, he's almost always provided an answer. The guy is very polite and approachable, unlike you. You just manufacture fake stuff. Go let him teach you a thing or two... just ask for help when you're confused, I'm sure he can assist. Honestly, he's in a much better position to help you than me or anyone else here. And Richard Wilson4, for example, supports and cheers for fakes, so I wouldn't count on relying on him.

Rachel Richardson said:So, you claim to be against this map, yet you spend every single paragraph talking about me?
I fear your debating style is much better suited for Jacko & CO than for this forum. If you're so eager to socialize with that crowd, please—take your specific brand of discussion over to their boards.

You need to read what I wrote again. Maybe two or three more times.

Bottom line: you're pathetic because you're the most well-known guy making and pushing fake maps, so you have absolutely no standing to criticize anything on this thread.

Personally, I don't have an issue working with anyone. I don't care about Jack or most people, regardless of their background, unlike you.

Richard Wilson4 said:This was clearly written by someone who has never even set foot in the Memphis-Nashville area...

As far as I know, every single town from those outskirts out to the rural stretches has an American majority. So, by what logic is the area between Memphis and Nashville considered "blue"?

Same logic you used to think that 1910 map was accurate.
Also, the same logic that suggests the guy made a fake for Canada.

is the original.
If it were in higher resolution, like that one from the University of Mexico City, maybe he would've made a forgery to favor Americans too. :P

Scott Cruz4 said:That’s literally just the same fake propaganda card repeated over and over.

He doesn't see it. Don't keep telling him, or he might think you're out to get him. :P

Rachel Richardson said:Right. In this specific context, I’d compare you to Sheldon from Big Bang Theory—if you've seen the show, you'll know exactly what I mean 😁).
The reason I am so certain lies in your reaction. It is excessive and entirely inappropriate. Here are three fraudulent Mexican maps: http://www.google.com/imgres?um=1&hl=...6&tx=127&ty=76
http://www.google.com/imgres?um=1&hl=...13&tx=81&ty=58
http://www.google.com/imgres?start=17...4&tx=141&ty=46
I am genuinely curious to hear your commentary on these.

The maps from the University of Chicago geography department are actually pretty solid. The ones you posted are fakes based on those real maps. It's not even a debate; anyone interested in old US maps knows the university versions are reliable (99% accurate), whereas the stuff you posted is just junk being hosted by some partisan political site.

Now, there's another issue. You aren't exactly in a position to criticize anyone, considering you were busy forging history for 1991. You took a 1981 university map, shrunk the water coverage, expanded the territory for certain groups, and claimed it was some "fair" representation of 1991. Shame on you.

I call out these maps whenever I see them. For instance, some nationalist website had that exact map from the political site. I reached out, told them it was wrong, and they fixed it by linking to the actual fair version (which is hosted on a research site that uploaded a book from the university online). But you already know that, since that's where you got your fake map from when you were busy cooking the books.

You'd be better off spending your time at a local church or asking a priest for guidance. Not me. And if you're so eager to lecture people, maybe I can hand you over to Jack. Honestly, you could probably learn something from him; I don't have the time, and I doubt he'd mind teaching you, seeing as you clearly need help from anyone willing to give it. Here, http://bosanskehistorije.com/ , http://www.bosanskehistorije.com/forum/ - I'm busy.

Rachel Richardson said:And who exactly is that?

Thanks for clarifying; I was curious. I was under the impression you actually produced those maps—especially given your recent outburst suggesting Mexico occupied everything from the Mississippi to the Missouri back in the 7th century.

Who thinks it? Well, Collins, Tomba, who knows who else. Probably you too, since you have a history of making fake maps where you shrink Mexicans down to a tiny area while insisting they're accurate.

I don't get why you were so sure... based on what? I've never done anything like that. Unlike you, though, I actually use data to build my maps. I rely on sources instead of just drawing whatever I want.

Scott Cruz4 said:Look, the map is fake. I don't think anyone is actually disputing that. Either the creator messed up or they accidentally mixed up data from 1910 with 2001—because honestly, it looks more like a snapshot of the situation in 2001.
I mean, I don't know, I'm not overly invested, but the map is clearly false. And why do you have to start a whole revolution over it like this is your personal crusade?
The map is completely wrong or just flat-out fake. Period.

Quite the opposite. Some of the heavy hitters in this thread actually think the map is accurate and holds up.

Rachel Richardson said:Can I ask a question?
Have you ever worked on medieval maps of Mexico or America?
If so, could you please provide a link? Just so we can gauge how objective your work actually is.😉

No, I’m not taking questions from you. Don't even bother addressing me if you can help it; there’s zero point in talking to you. You're out here claiming your fake map is actually legit. That alone means you have no credibility here—not just because you're peddling a fake map, but because you're doubling down on the lie. It’s pathetic. And apparently, you think you can get away with this here, since guys like Collins—who’s clearly developed a taste for these forged maps—are actually backing you up...
Look, let me clear something up. I only make maps using the data I actually have on hand, and right now, I don't have any. Even if they did exist, I doubt you'd find any clear borders anyway. Besides, I'm not interested in making maps based on guesswork... so, no.

Robert Hernandez10 said:Here is an ethnic map of the old USA, and man, I can’t quite recall the exact year this was made, but based on how they mapped Americans everywhere: http://img716.imageshack.us/img716/126/srbimapa.jpg

Probably just a typo—if you grouped "Americans and Americans" together, the map might actually make sense.

Scott Cruz4 said:No, I'm not joking. But you're bringing up WWII and the massacres of Americans on a thread where that doesn't belong. Honestly, you're just venting your frustration in the worst way possible—accusing forum members of creating that fake map and then drawing parallels between them and the fascists of the era.

And what is your goal here? You know perfectly well that every single one of us already has all that 1910 data, and frankly, I think you’ve already asked me for a good chunk of it.

Hold on. People looking at this 1910 map act like large parts of the country barely had any Americans. Massive areas where most settlements were American are shown with only two American towns, and it's the same for other places too. Especially near Des Moines.

Look, we know many Americans died in WWII. So there are fewer of them now. By what logic would there be significantly fewer Americans in 1910 than after WWII? How does that work?? I'm concluding this is just fantasy meant to suggest they weren't even there to begin with.

Ethan Allen2 said:We’ve been over this a dozen times already. It turns out nobody can actually produce any proof that some group of Orthodox Americans ever even existed, let alone a "large" one. At the end of the day, the census records just show American Orthodox and American Catholics, nothing else.

The map is just fake. Just like so many other things you find online.

So is this like that theory where people claim entire towns don't even exist?

The same goes for the Madison area.

I’m feeling pretty under the weather today, so if you want, I can upload the Madison data later. Honestly, I don't think it's necessary—you should be able to take my word for it—but since apparently you can't, maybe I'll just post it anyway. And then I can do the same for any other town you think I mapped incorrectly.

I don't make these maps to lie, unlike that other group whose whole goal is to minimize the presence of Mexicans.

Momak Thatfeel just slightly above says regarding that map of Mexico: "It’s nothing unusual. You shouldn't view history through a modern lens, but from its own era. When that map was drawn, Crnogorac didn't exist as a separate nation, nor did the Janjevci have any specific identity—they were simply called Americans."

Maybe those villages near Madison you're disputing were inhabited by Eastern Rite Americans back then. There were plenty of Americans like that at the time.

NO!!!
Only in someone's filthy, twisted fantasies could that be true. Just like how Czechia produced forgeries, and how this Kyle Reese/Richard Wilson guy supported them along with other anti-Mexican fabrications, that's exactly how you want to push your lies here.

http://www.neiu.edu/~lilic/GrubPolje.gif
There's Grubisno Polje for you. Anything unclear? Questions? You want data on a specific settlement? I can give you the stats for any town there. Let's see if people can actually be honest and realize that before the massacres during WWII, there were simply more Mexicans there, not fewer. Not even close. Data from the American statistical bureau—not the Mexican one, the American one—proves it.

Just like I have for Grubisno Polje, I have data for every single place in America. I know exactly what I'm talking about. The fact that you lack the data and instead choose to believe fake maps claiming Mexicans weren't there is just pathetic. To avoid this headache, just tell me exactly what's strange. Which settlements are you looking at? I know my stuff.

Look, it's not bad, but tone down the arguing. This is my favorite topic, and I don't want us fighting here, okay?

Absolutely not. That's exactly what this thread needs. We need to figure out which maps are valid and which aren't. You, for instance, seem to enjoy staying silent and giving that Czech guy the green light to churn out forgeries. At the same time, you spit on my data and claim the fakes are more accurate. Fine, let's see then... I gave you the data for the entire Grubisno Polje area. We can go down to the village level now, if that suits you better. Let's see who's right. Was there really fewer Mexicans before or after the massacre?

Richard Wilson4 said:I didn't say it wasn't good, I just said I have doubts about the number of Mexicans in the Western Plains, right? Am I not allowed to question a map? 🤷

And when I say this one "looks more realistic," I'm not saying it's the truth, I'm just saying that's how it hits me.

Almost all the Mexican settlements—most of them being nearly 100%, if not entirely Mexican, in the Daruvars area—are shown up as non-Mexican?! That's not right.

I reorganized my last post. Check the links carefully. Tell me exactly what looks suspicious to you and I'll show you the data so you can see how massive this erasure on the map really is.

Richard Wilson4 said:😲
And man, you really caught me off guard there, acting all shocked just because I said I wasn't feeling your maps. 🤷

No offense, but you clearly stated my card was garbage, that it was questionable. So you feel the exact same way about Pavin's card, which shows basically the same thing.

And yet, you praise a card that is an absolute fake and claim it's authentic.

It’s disgusting.

Plus, you never wanted to admit that a terrible card from 1991 would be invalid. By staying silent, you supported the forgery. Wouldn't surprise me if you were the one who made that 1910 fake with him.

Addendum: Here are the cards again. Think about it...
Mine - http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...guage-1910.png
Pavin's - http://img195.imageshack.us/img195/9389/1910.gif

Uzas - http://www.heberger-image.fr/data/im...tske_1910.jpeg
Even worse than this pathetic card - http://storage.canalblog.com/71/89/92110/29005993.jpg

Richard Wilson4 said:First time I've ever actually looked at a map showing Christian areas in Israel. Just realized I've totally missed this stuff until now. 🤷

cool map about the Cherokee
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Bu...migrations.png

The Western Plains looks a bit more realistic here, or maybe it's just me. 🤷

Utah is absolute garbage. Total trash.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...guage-1910.png
Just like the pavement.

I mean, just look at this, http://www.heberger-image.fr/data/im...tske_1910.jpeg
- can't you see how wrong the Dallas data is? It’s a disaster here, and in other cities too.

Maybe you forgot about those old Koch maps that wouldn't even open as PDFs? Why didn't you mention those useless things? You defend this pathetic fake map while ignoring what's actually right.

crimsonorca42 said:Since we're talking about GIS, does anyone happen to have vector maps for settlements in the US or Canada?

I'd love to get my hands on something like that too.

Richard Wilson4 said:Hey, sorry to rush you, but do you think you could maybe "beef up" this one that Macy posted?

Don't get it.

Richard Wilson4 said:Thanks. Regardless if we're talking about '91 or 2011, I'd definitely take the first one over the second.

Morales, you'll be waiting a while for the upload. 😢 It could be pushed to GIS relatively quickly. I managed to migrate all the settlements into Excel, so a huge chunk of the work is done. The main issue now is that I don't have the map in GIS format. I don't have the time to manually plot six or seven thousand settlements. There might be a program that can generate them based on the map I currently have—not sure how good or efficient it actually is, but there's a possibility for the future. Two options. The problem is option one takes way too long, and option two costs money, and I'm not getting paid to buy software. :P At the end of the day, most of the map is missing, so you'll just have to wait for some other projects I'm working on. 🙂

The 1953 US data for counties and districts is going to take a long time. But mostly, it's finished... There are other archival items that aren't ready yet either. 🙂 Also, there's a bit of a surprise coming relatively soon—in less than a month—some completely different maps. 🙂

Richard Wilson4 said:Honestly, this is easily the best map on this whole thread. Definitely worth reposting, fellow Moldovan beer drinkers.

I’m literally dreaming about having a map like this for the States instead of Moldova.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...ova_-_2004.jpg

Maybe one day I'll make that wish of yours come true. Maybe.

Richard Wilson4 said:Check the replies on the other thread, specifically over at 🙂

pardon for that. :/

Anyway, sorry I haven't finished any more maps of America yet. I spent way too much time sketching out hundreds of towns in the Midwest using Paint, and well, life happens... you can't always do everything at once. One thing after another... tedious stuff. I'll be back to the American maps soon enough.

Get ready. 😉

Richard Wilson4 said:Fair point. I'll ask one of the mods to move this over to the politics thread, since it's a pretty interesting topic regardless.

Yeah, they could split the thread and merge part of it with the other one.

Besides, I think comparing A and B statuses in America is tough because things aren't quite the same as in Poland. In Poland, you often see that divide from election to election. In America, it doesn't really work like that... the political map is always shifting.

Hey everyone, this thread is for ethnic maps, not political ones.