I've already been born so my odds should be updated.
this post was submitted on 22 Jun 2025
484 points (96.4% liked)
Map Enthusiasts
4768 readers
24 users here now
For the map enthused!
Rules:
-
post relevant content: interesting, informative, and/or pretty maps
-
be nice
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
This is actually percent of each population that believes in reincarnation
load more comments
(2 replies)
It’s not zero for Antarctica, just nearly zero. 11 people have been born in Antarctica. Mostly argentinians but also a couple chileans.
Okay and that would still be less than 0.00% which is the significant figures on the chart. They can't just put 0.01.because 11 out 8 billion people were born there.
They could have put <0.01 but either way there's no real society/culture there to bwgin with. I personally wouldn't have even included it on the map.
I will say if they were included on education stats, they would probably top all global charts.
It's a good reminder though that 0.0% doesn't have to equal 0
And lets not get into the nationality thing there
load more comments
(2 replies)
New Zealand’s gone missing again, I’m assuming it’s lumped in with Australia.
New Zealand is in stealth mode. We keep it off the maps so trump doesn't know it exists and leaves it alone
It's crazy they did include a bit of Russia near Alaska and also bothered to add the Galapagos (where nobody lives) but omitted NZ
No chance of being born in New Zealand I see
It's more proof it doesn't exist.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Remember everyone: 100.00% does not mean all, and 0.00% does not mean none, just like 50.00% does not mean exactly half. They all are accurate to 0.005% points.
Maps without New Zealand
I'm not so sure I would trust any statistics from a map that's missing New Zealand.
load more comments
(1 replies)
With all the scientists and cruises that tour around Antarctica, I am not convinced that the chances of being born there are a flat 0. It might be less than 1% but no way it's 0.
At least 11 babies have been born in Antarctica.
0.0000001375%!
(This is based solely on roughly how many people exist, not birth rates, because I ain't doing the real math for what is ultimately a rounding error)
So me being born in Australia was like getting a mythic prize in a loot crate.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Technically Antarctica isn't 0. There's a civilian colony and at least one baby has been born there.
Eh it rounds down at that point
11 people were born there. That's a ~0.00000000133649348822 chance. Small but not impossible.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Yet Americans act like they're 90% of the world and no one and nothing outside the US matters.
load more comments
(2 replies)
How about chances of being born in the ocean, or even on this planet?
load more comments
(6 replies)
I misread this as "Chances of being born in each Connecticut" and while I know humans are fond of naming places after existing places, I'd be surprised if every continent has a place officially named Connecticut
Antarctica doesn't have one apparently
Can't believe I used up all my luck for that
Fellow Antarctican?
What time frame does this represent?
Births in 2025 might be majority subsaharan Africa.
It would be really interesting to see chances of being born across all time. Like what is the probability of being born here and now vs. somewhere else in the past or the future.
You would have to make some predictions based on population growth and maybe model a few different possible apocalypses (average species lifetime/meteor probabilities/nuclear doomsday/climate disaster etc.) but it would be a fun model to play with.
load more comments
(7 replies)
load more comments
(3 replies)
Ok, now make this but per land area.
there are three continents, four if you have to add Australia
don't give me that canal crap either, i will die on this hill
Continents are mostly a cultural subdivisions, not based on geology, it's pointless to debate about it. Good video on the topic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hrsxRJdwfM0
load more comments
(6 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
view more: next ›