Final-Fan said:
Kasz216 said:
Final-Fan said:
Kasz216 said:
Final-Fan said:
"To be a continent you need to not be connected to another "continent" by a large piece of land... and be the largest owner of a teconic plate. (For example how North America owns more of the North American Plate then the afore mentioned east russia."
This doesn't make sense to me. As in, I literally don't know what point you're trying to make. What does it mean that North America owns "more of" its plate than east Russia, which isn't a continental component at all? Is this a jumbled way of saying (as I was saying) that that land belongs to the NA plate and hence to NA? |
What I meant though, was that there is more landmass in North America with there is Russia. Otherwise I believe North America would be consdiered an Island of Eurasia... or more percisely an Island of the subcontinent of East Russia. Much how Andama Island is an Island of the Indian sub continent.
Same plate, not connected, but more of the plate belongs to the continent of Eurasia then the Island.
|
I think I see what you were trying to say. But all I wanted to dispute is which continent gets credit for ownership of the area, in terms of geology or plate tectonics. And it's clearly North America, just by looking at the map IMO. But you, I, and everyone else consider it part of Asia. Which was my point that that's not the only thing geography considers.
|
No, the other thing it considers is if it's connected to another piece of land by a large area... like I said above. It's large connection to Eurasia prevents it from being an Island of N.A. while North America having more of the plate prevents it from being a sub continent.
Although, i have to ask you... why do you consider it part of Asia and not part of Europe. Assuming you support the 7 continent theory.
What about East Russia makes it more Asian then Europeon?
|
But according to what you said earlier, I'd think you'd consider it an island of North America. Although that seems silly, it's the logical extension of going entirely by plates IMO. If not for mashing into Asia it WOULD be an island. Looking at it from your perspective of judging by the plates, just letting another continent "borrow" your land and claim it as part of itself is even stranger IMO.
Maybe it can be the American subcontinent of Asia?
As for your question: Because it's east of the Ural mountain range?
|
1) Nah, I wouldn't consider it an Island because it's connected to eurasia by a big enough piece of land.
America would be considered an Island because it's only conected by Panama which isn't a big enough connection for North and South America to be considered one continent, with South America being a sub continent.
If that was the case... North America would be part of the South American continent... though not even in the form of a sub continent... like how East Russia isn't a sub continent.
2) The Urals are the common answer... but are a physical seperation, when most people were claiming the cultural seperation is what makes europe different. However with the Urals being the split... there is no cultural difference between Europe and Asia, because East Russia or Asia Russia has an IDENTICAL culture more or less to West Russia or Europeon Russia.
It's kind of like the greeks. They split Europe and Asia where they did because it put the Ionian greeks on one side... and the "mainland" greeks on the other side. In otherwords... the Free greeks were on one side... while the enslaved by the persian "loser" greeks were on the other side.
In this case... you don't even have that criteia... making the whole reason for europe being a continent even more murky.
