Final-Fan said:
Kasz216 said:
Final-Fan said:
Kasz216 said:
Final-Fan said:
Kasz216 said:
Ok, i'll put it another way. Plate tectonics dictates geography. As for the "larger point" It's irrelevent. If India ever becomes part of the eurasian tectonic plate... it would then lose it's sub continent status. |
Are you really telling me that you consider eastern Russia to be actually part of North America?
I mean, it's part of the same tectonic plate, so in the "plate tectonics geography" sense it certainly is, but I don't think of it that way, I think of it as part of Asia's Far East. But you think of it as "the Far West"?
|
No, because of the other dictating factor to being a continent. Being connected by a large stretch of land. Plate tectonics are what decide a sub continent vs a pennisula. |
So ... wait. Being an active plate makes the difference between a subcontinent and a mere peninsula, but a small difference in water level can decide what CONTINENT huge areas of land belong to regardless of plate tectonics?
Fishy, my friend, very fishy.
This makes me wonder: In the last Ice Age when the Bering Strait was dry, was Eurasia a subcontinent of North and South America, or the other way around? (South America is of course a subcontinent of North America, of course, because (A) we're the REAL America and (B) we're on top.)
|
How is that fishy? It's actual science, geography and geology.
I don't quite remember what the land looked like in the last ice age... but when deterimining a sub continent from continent "prime" there is an easy answer.
Whatever is bigger in area. This is where size comes in. Whichever land mass is bigger is it's own continent.
Which i'm guessing would be Eurasia... but like I said... I don't have a good map of the iceage I can find... and it's been ages since i've taken historical geography.
Worst class i've ever taken. We had 100 question tests... WEEKLY. You practically had to know his lectures verbatum.
You'd think I'd still remember the continents of the last ice age because I had to know every little thing about it, but nope.
|
It seems very questionable to me that the land west of the Bering Strait, land that belongs to THE NORTH AMERICAN CONTINENTAL PLATE, is geologically considered part of Eurasia. Regardless of the dryness or wetness of the Bering Strait.
And incidentally, some people consider North and South America as a single continent ... which would be bigger than Eurasia I believe, otherwise Eurasia very probably wins.
The continents would be pretty much the same, only bigger to greater or lesser degree depending on how shallow their coasts are. Obviously the Bering Strait is shallow enough to have been above sea level at that time, connecting all the continents except Antarctica and (I'm pretty sure) Australia.
Here's a map I found: http://www.scotese.com/lastice.htm Southeast Asia and Australia are the obvious big winners; Africa seems to have the least change.
|
I don't know why that seems questionable to you. Honestly in this case... i can't see because of the way the picture is... is the bering stratight really larger then Panama or the Suez connections before canals were put in.
Also, something I forgot to mention before... underwater land masses can't count. I mean otherwise... there would be only one continent... since the earth is just one solid sphere of land in reality.
