• Klear@piefed.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        21 days ago

        Continent is an arbitrary division not consistently backed by any actual geological features.

              • kkj@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                20 days ago

                I’d appreciate if you could answer the question. Do you perhaps have another geologic feature to propose? If you want to use large landmasses, then islands don’t belong to any continents at all. If you don’t set a minimum size, then there are far too many continents to remember. So what is it?

                • 0_o7@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  20 days ago

                  Do you perhaps have another geologic feature to propose? If you want to use large landmasses, then islands don’t belong to any continents at all.

                  Isn’t proximity a good argument? This is exact kind of tomfoolery he’s talking about.

                  He called out your arbitrary bs and now you go on a dense stupid defense.

                • VAK@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  19 days ago

                  Australia is the minimum size. Isthmuses, oceans and seas are separators. Islands don’t belong to any continent. What do you think?

                  • kkj@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    ·
                    19 days ago

                    That’s a solid start, but what’s your threshold for an isthmus? Does Panama count, or is there only one American continent? Same question for the Sinai.

                    And if they don’t count, Australia’s inclusion seems a bit arbitrary, given the massive size difference between it and the next-largest landmass (the Americas are nearly 6x the size).

                    Furthermore, if isthmuses count, why not mountain ranges? The Urals and Himalayas have historically been at least as important as barriers as any body of water small enough to have a land bridge.