what are the positives and negatives of the Polar map projections?
But then, no effort to put a 3-D sphere onto a 2-D square will ever include all the data. Something gets warped in the process, which is why we have conal projection, Mercator projection, etc. All of these show the data from a certain starting point (Mercator starts at the equator and distorts from there.) Polar merely reverses that and starts at the poles and warps from there. Between the two, Washington State is getting jerked around twice! In other words, if one won’t have an actual globe, then one needs more than merely one square, 2-D map of the world. I like the Encyclopdiea Britannica method, myself: multiple maps, 2-D, but of individual countries or areas small enough that the warping doesn’t matter.
