You’ve seen it. You’ve probably even argued about it during a late-night Wikipedia rabbit hole. You open up a standard map of world Greenland looks like this absolute titan, a massive white landmass that seems to rival the entire continent of Africa in sheer scale. It’s sitting up there at the top of the Mercator projection, looking like it could swallow Europe for breakfast. But honestly? It’s a total lie. Well, maybe not a lie, but a very specific kind of mathematical distortion that has shaped how we view our planet for over 450 years.
Greenland is actually quite small.
If you took the real Greenland and plopped it over Africa, it would look like a tiny island. Africa is roughly 14 times larger than Greenland. Yet, on the maps we use for Google Maps or the ones hanging in elementary school classrooms, they look nearly identical in size. This isn't a conspiracy. It’s geometry. When you try to peel a round orange and flatten the skin onto a rectangular table, things are going to rip, stretch, and deform.
The Mercator Problem and Your Map of World Greenland
Gerardus Mercator was a smart guy. Back in 1569, he wasn't trying to make northern countries look more powerful or "important," which is a common myth you'll hear in some academic circles. He was trying to solve a very practical problem for sailors. If you’re on a ship in the middle of the Atlantic and you want to sail from point A to point B using a constant compass bearing, you need a map where straight lines represent actual constant headings.
This is called a loxodrome.
To keep those lines straight, Mercator had to stretch the map. As you move away from the equator toward the poles, the map stretches horizontally and vertically at the same rate. This preserves shapes. It’s great for navigation because a harbor looks like a harbor, but it’s a disaster for area. The further you get from the equator, the more the "inflation" kicks in. Greenland, being so far north, gets hit with the maximum level of "geographic bloat."
Just how big is it, really?
Let's look at the actual numbers because they’re kind of mind-blowing when you compare them to the visual. Greenland covers about 836,000 square miles. Sounds big, right? But Africa is 11.7 million square miles. Australia is nearly 3 million square miles. On a standard map of world Greenland often appears larger than Australia, even though Australia is nearly four times its size.
I remember the first time I used a tool like "The True Size Of." You can click on Greenland and drag it down to the equator. As you move it south, it literally shrinks before your eyes. By the time you reach Brazil, it looks like a modest island. This happens because the Mercator projection is a cylindrical map projection. Imagine a light bulb inside a glass globe, projecting the continents onto a cylinder of paper wrapped around the equator. The light has to travel much further to hit the paper at the top and bottom, spreading the image out.
Why We Still Use This Distorted View
You’d think that with modern GPS and satellites, we’d have moved on from a 16th-century map. But we haven't. If you open Google Maps right now on your browser, you’re looking at a variation called Web Mercator.
It’s used because it allows for seamless zooming.
When you’re looking at a street level in London or New York, you want the street corners to be 90-degree angles. If we used an "equal-area" map like the Gall-Peters or the Mollweide, the streets would look skewed and tilted as you panned around. For local navigation, Mercator is king. For global perspective? It’s a mess.
The Gall-Peters Controversy
In the 1970s, a historian named Arno Peters started a bit of a revolution. He promoted a map that showed the "true" sizes of continents. In his version, Africa and South America look like long, stretched-out taffy, and Greenland is a tiny speck at the top. He argued that the Mercator projection was inherently Eurocentric and racist because it made the "Global North" look massive and the "Global South" look tiny.
While his heart was in the right place regarding social justice, cartographers—the people who actually make maps for a living—mostly hated it.
They pointed out that while Peters got the area right, he butchered the shapes. On a Peters map, nothing looks like it does in real life. Continents are distorted vertically to make the math work. It’s a trade-off. In cartography, you can have accurate shape, accurate area, or accurate distance, but you can almost never have all three on a flat piece of paper. This is known as "The Mapmaker’s Dilemma."
Finding a Better Map of World Greenland
If you want to see what the world actually looks like without the Greenland-sized ego, you have to look at "compromise projections." These aren't perfect for navigation, and they aren't perfect for area, but they try to split the difference.
- The Robinson Projection: This was the gold standard for the National Geographic Society for years. It curves the edges to make the poles look a bit more realistic. Greenland still looks a bit big, but it’s not nearly as egregious as the Mercator.
- The Winkel Tripel: This is what National Geographic uses now. It’s widely considered one of the most "accurate" feeling maps. It minimizes distortion of area, direction, and distance. In this view, Greenland finally starts to look like the large island it actually is, rather than a whole new continent.
- The Authagraph: This is a Japanese projection that is arguably the most accurate flat map ever made. It folds the world into a 3D shape before flattening it. It’s weird to look at, and the oceans look fragmented, but the sizes are spot on.
The Psychology of the Map
Does it matter? Honestly, yeah. Our brains are hardwired to associate "size" with "importance." When we see a map of world Greenland dominating the north, we subconsciously assign it more geopolitical weight than it actually has. Greenland has a population of about 56,000 people. That’s roughly the size of a small suburb in Ohio. Yet, on the map, it looks like a superpower.
This distortion affects how we perceive climate change, too. When people see the Greenland ice sheet on a Mercator map, it looks like this infinite, unending white expanse. While the ice sheet is massive and its melting is a global catastrophe, its actual physical footprint is smaller than it appears. Understanding the scale helps us understand the science.
🔗 Read more: USB Stick Not Showing Up: What Most People Get Wrong When Their Drive Vanishes
Navigating the Digital World
In 2018, Google actually made a huge change. If you zoom all the way out on the desktop version of Google Maps, it no longer shows you a flat Mercator map. It switches to a 3D globe.
This was a massive win for geographic literacy.
When you spin that 3D globe, Greenland finally takes its rightful place. You can see how it fits tucked between Canada and Northern Europe without the weird stretching. However, the second you start searching for directions or looking at a specific city, the map flattens back out into Mercator. The technology chooses "utility" over "truth" every single time.
Real World Impacts of Mapping Errors
It’s not just about Greenland. The Mercator projection makes Alaska look as big as the contiguous United States (it’s actually about one-fifth the size). It makes Antarctica look like an infinite white wall at the bottom of the world, rather than a circular continent.
I’ve talked to pilots who use specific polar projections because a "straight line" on a Mercator map is actually a much longer route than the "great circle" route they actually fly. If a pilot tried to fly a straight line on a flat map from New York to London, they’d waste a ton of fuel and time. They have to fly an arc that looks "curved" on a flat map but is actually the shortest distance on a sphere.
How to Fix Your Mental Map
So, what should you do next time you see a map of world Greenland looking like a monster?
First, stop using flat maps to judge size. If you want to know how big a country is, look up its square mileage or use a globe. Second, check out the "AuthaGraph" or the "Cahill-Keyes" projections if you want to see some really cool, non-traditional ways of looking at our home. They’re mind-bending but much more "honest" about how much space we all take up.
Third, use the "The True Size Of" website. It’s a free tool that lets you drag countries around. Drag Greenland over to Africa. Drag it over to the US. Drag it over to Australia. It’s the fastest way to deprogram the Mercator distortion from your brain.
Actionable Insights for the Geographically Curious
- Audit your classroom or office: If you have a map on the wall, check the bottom corner for the "projection" type. If it says Mercator, treat the sizes of anything north of Canada or south of Australia as "visual suggestions" rather than facts.
- Compare by the numbers: Always keep a few mental benchmarks. Africa is 30 million km². Greenland is 2.1 million km². If they look the same size on your screen, the map is lying to you for the sake of convenience.
- Teach the "Orange Peel" method: If you have kids, take an orange, draw some "continents" on it, and then try to peel it and lay the skin flat. It’s the easiest way to explain why Greenland has to be stretched to make the map a rectangle.
- Support better cartography: When buying maps for decor, look for "Equal Earth" or "Winkel Tripel" prints. They look more sophisticated and they don't give Greenland an inflated sense of self-importance.
The map is not the territory. It’s a tool. And like any tool, it has a specific purpose. The Mercator projection was built to keep sailors from hitting rocks, not to teach us the relative size of nations. Once you realize that, you'll never look at a world map the same way again. Greenland is a beautiful, massive island, but it's not the continent-sized behemoth our maps have led us to believe. It’s just a victim of some really aggressive 16th-century math.
To truly understand the scale of our world, you have to stop looking at rectangles and start looking at spheres. The globe is the only "map" that doesn't have a hidden agenda or a mathematical quirk. Everything else is just a compromise.