TIL that there is no strict definition of a continent
TIL that there is no strict definition of a continent
Started an argument with my much smarter wife because she said North and South America are not two separate continents. She was right, because continents are only defined by convention.
You're viewing a single thread.
There is a useful way to do it: By looking at Tectonic Plates and their boundaries.
I mean, it useful to geologists. Not so much to economists or sociologists.
According to the image on Wikipedia depicting the plates, there would then be 17 continents, although some of those 17 would be entirely ocean, or only small islands
That map is pure chaotic good vibes.
Half of Japan would be North American? I didn't expect that.
Lots of island chains are actually mountain chains partially hidden underwater. And mountain chains usually appear where two tectonic plates ram into one another, causing one of them to bunch up.
They do like to play baseball.
I’m really surprised this is the first time I’ve seen Africa as two continents. The Great Rift Valley is well known but I just hadn’t heard going the next logical step
The Red Sea is actually just another rift valley along the same edge of the plate. It just filled in with water first.
These are not continents. The image is more of an illustration of why tectonic plates are not a good way to redefine continents not be arbitrary.
And then India is no longer in Eurasia. Or you could say that Los Angeles is not in North America.
Los Angeles is not in North America
I don't see a problem with that.
Plus, by tectonic plates, isn't it America, since N/C/S America are on the same plate, right? (I don't trust my memory of school from decades ago).
India is usually considered a subcontinent. West Coast is a geologic mess until resolved.