this post was submitted on 12 Aug 2023
132 points (92.9% liked)

Today I Learned

17770 readers
1087 users here now

What did you learn today? Share it with us!

We learn something new every day. This is a community dedicated to informing each other and helping to spread knowledge.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must begin with TIL. Linking to a source of info is optional, but highly recommended as it helps to spark discussion.

** Posts must be about an actual fact that you have learned, but it doesn't matter if you learned it today. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.**



Rule 2- Your post subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your post subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Posts and comments which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding non-TIL posts.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-TIL posts using the [META] tag on your post title.



Rule 7- You can't harass or disturb other members.

If you vocally harass or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.

For further explanation, clarification and feedback about this rule, you may follow this link.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.

Unless included in our Whitelist for Bots, your bot will not be allowed to participate in this community. To have your bot whitelisted, please contact the moderators for a short review.



Partnered Communities

You can view our partnered communities list by following this link. To partner with our community and be included, you are free to message the moderators or comment on a pinned post.

Community Moderation

For inquiry on becoming a moderator of this community, you may comment on the pinned post of the time, or simply shoot a message to the current moderators.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] pjhenry1216@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'd be more on board with your lake theory if Minnesota has more lakes if using Wisconsin 's criteria. Otherwise whoever has the largest lakes can just change the definition of lake to weed out everyone else. As far as I know, a lake is simply a body of water surrounded by land. Ponds are just small lakes. Some seas are just large lakes.

[–] GunnarStahlGloveSide@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

They do. If Minnesota and Wisconsin used similar criteria, Minnesota would have something like 40k more.

https://www.cbsnews.com/minnesota/news/which-has-more-lakes-minnesota-or-wisconsin/

[–] pjhenry1216@kbin.social -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It literally says if you use Wisconsin's criteria, Wisconsin comes out ahead. You're just repeating the same argument. The only new info is the USGS puts Michigan ahead but doesn't state the criteria used so it's hard to say. And Wisconsin comes ahead of you count surface area and the portions of the the various great lakes residing in each state.

[–] GunnarStahlGloveSide@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What? Where does it say that?

Also, The article mentions Lake Michigan, not the state

[–] pjhenry1216@kbin.social -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Since you weren't specific, here's the source paragraphs for both claims:

According to the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Minnesota technically has 11,842 lakes. Those lakes are defined as bodies of water 10 acres or more.

According to the Wisconsin DNR, Wisconsin has 15,074 "documented" lakes. Those are defined as bodies of water 2.2 acres or more. Of those lakes, about 6,000 are named.

15k is larger than 12k.

Last claim:

Finally, Minnesota still comes out ahead by counting surface area covered by lakes. But by adding what both states claim for Lake Superior and Michigan, Wisconsin has twice as much lake surface area.

Emphasis mine.

Did you not link the article you thought? Cause it clearly mentions both states. Michigan is definitely mentioned more than just Lake Michigan.

[–] GunnarStahlGloveSide@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Your quoted segments clearly reference the different criteria (10 acres versus 2.2).

And the word “Michigan” appears exactly once in the article: in the second bit you quoted where it clearly refers to the lake.

[–] pjhenry1216@kbin.social 0 points 1 year ago

I feel like you simply never read my initial comment at this point if that's your response.

And I realized I literally just meant to say Minnesota, not Michigan, so you're correct there. But it's a moot point.