Hmm, Browsing the forums, bumped into this forum. And unfortunately and pitifully, there was just one thread telling what this forum is for and even more bad, there was another thread which was a technical question.
So you see, it probably only means guys on this forum just can "get away" (as neo describes this forum for) with technology.
This particular forum doesnt appear to be as old as the others but sure is an interesting category, for non-interesting people, I guess
well, but it seems interesting to me, and I am now wondering what kind of non-technical stuff is going to here. Now guys please dont start getting any ideas.
hmm, how about someone putting down some
office experiences, some real funny events at workplace
Life History of Perderabo (or adolf hitler for that matter :p)
did earth always have 7 continents.
guys, I am going to steal some topics from National Geographic now
My life history would be boring. Hmmm, not sure what to make of seeing myself mentioned in the same breath as Adolf Hitler, but I guess I'll let that one pass. But the Earth having 7 continents? I can't let that one pass.
The Earth does not have 7 continents any more than it has 7 seas. In both cases the number seven was chosen and then folks went looking for the 7 continents and the 7 seas. Lots of folks insist that the Earth has 7 seas, but try to find 2 who give you the same list. Lots of folks insist that the Earth has 7 continents as well. OK, they will usually give you the same list. But now ask them where the division between Asia and Europe is. And ask them why it is necessary to split Asia and Europe. And by the way, when I said "usually" I meant it. The majority name Australia as the seventh continent. But a few authorities lump Australia together with a number of other islands and call the congomeration "The Continent of Oceanland" or something like that. (I promise that I'm not making this up. This is too goofy. I can't make stuff like this up.)
I believe that there are 11 seas and 13 continents. But I don't have either list yet. Give me a few years and I'll get back to you.
Thirteen? That seems to be too many doesn't it? Um... let's see now...
1 & 2. North and South America
3. Africa
4. Europe
5. Asia
6. Australia/Oceania
7. Antarctica
That's it. I've run out. I don't think that the Arctic is a continent on its own... there isn't much land there under all that ice. And Perderabo, my two cents about the border between Europe and Asia - North of the Black Sea it would be the border of Russia and South of the Black Sea, it would be the border of Turkey.
Ringing in the oceans! Wikipedia lists five oceans on the oceans page,
Pacific
Atlantic
Indian
Southern
Arctic
The Southern Ocean is new and has recently been rung in by the International Hydrographic Organisation. It starts at 60 S latitude around the world and goes all the way down south. This is however disputed by other reputed organisations such as National Geographic which show the Pacific, the Atlantic and the Indian oceans stretching all the way down to the Antarctic.
I suspect though I have done no checking on this that the southern ocean comes about by the fact that although Indean, Pacific and Atlantic oceans strech as a single body of water to the Antartic without major landmasses intervening this is not entirely true shouth of Australia.
That being left aside, North Athlantic, South Atlantic, North Pacific and south Pacific are often classified as seperate oceans.
As for continents, then number depends on how you define a continent, and how finely you draw these line. Some possible lines which could be drawn are along geo-political or cultural lines (this could yield far more continents), by tectonic lines in which case the boundary is a tectonic plate boundary, and yet another would be by continuous surface landmass in which case there would be fewer (as Perderderabo said: why is Europe a different from Asia or are North and South America two continents or one)
In fact even as things currently stand there are many that would argue that Indian sub-continent is in fact a full continent. If you were to draw the boundary as a major cultural change or landmass change I think you could easily get the 13 continents Perderabo mentioned with most notably Asia being further subdivided.
Continent comes from the Latin word for contain, which I still see as a requirement to count as a continent. Continent originally meant mainland. To leave a continent, you need a boat. When you can visit a building with a line going down the middle of a room showing the boundary between two continents, there is something very wrong. Anarctica is clearly a continent. America is one continent, not two. Digging a canal doesn't really count. People don't use boats to cross over the canal. Eurasia is clearly a continent and Africa is part of it. Australia seems a bit small. We have to set the bar rather low to count Australia, but ok, Australia is a continent too. That Oceanland thing is just silly. So I will concede 4 continents. But considering that people walked from Eurasia to America, I'm being generous.
This is exactly what my own personal take on things would be. Oceanland or Oceania or any such thing is nonsense, they are a grouping of relatively small islands and do not form a landmass significant enough to meet the requirements. At times I have tried to justify calling Africa a continent, but I always return to the same conclusion...you can walk there from Eurasia.
Agreed, but what is even worse is that people often pay to go into such buildings just to see said line.
I dont quite agree with you. Looking at the whole thing from a geological perspective, we had a single continent to begin with, but then the whole thing drifted apart and North and South America were seperated. So much so that there is absolutely no similarity between the flora/fauna of the two. In fact the land bridge that connects the two has not always existed in the past. The two landmasses are geographically distinct enough to classify them as seperate continents. The same is the case with Africa being part of Eurasia (Europe/Asia).
In the case of Europe and Asia, it is not the physically obvious differences, but history that plays a big part. If someone says western Europe, you know exactly where that is - western Eurasia will not ring any bells.
America has been a unified continent for the entire period it has been inhabited by humans. It's possible that millions of years ago, America was two continents, I'm not sure about that. But it's a single continent now. Should the Isthmus of Panama suddenly disappear somehow , the situation could change.
Also there is nothing wrong with regional terms like "Europe" or "Pacific Rim" or "Central America" or "The Middle East". These are useful terms and I use them all the time. But this doesn't make them continents.
ok, whatever, I am happy to see some activity triggered on this thread. Perderabo, no offense intended breathing you in with Hitler, but thot probably would just be another interesting documentary movie perhaps :d, and now I know, national geaographic would be happy to have you on the team to research the left over continents and seas
btw does the term sea and oceans go together, if not probably thats what it means to have 5 oceans and probably 7 seas or 13 or whatever
well having a water body between 2 great land masses counts it as a continent ? did read somewhere that one of the reason why Asia and europe were separate as continents is because of the huge mountain ranges, the himalayas that contribute to a clear line for distinction at the India-Russia border. but then yes mountains can be walked across.
hmmm, back from my winter holidays (it was great fun, btw.) and i have to see such a thread: i can't believe it!
Why, on earth (literally ), do you have to take a digression to something nontechnical like the number of continents - just to start a run-of-the-mill argument like this one? You could have stuck to the vi-vs-emacs-classic or even to the BSD-vs-SysV-perennial.
Ah, well, just wanted to tell you I'm back again and busy working (*sigh*). A (very late) happy new year to everyone here.
hi bakunin, welcome back and a very happpy new year to you too. looks like u have had a load of work year end, and u dont want to come out of the technical stuff, well this forum i thot was meant for non-technical stuff, so started to scribble something here. for ur technical stuff check the other forums
reborg, a good link tho. thanks for that info.
ok, guess this thread is not going to end up with a conclusion on the number of continents, lemme plan to come with some new non-technical thread
, the situation could change.
), do you have to take a digression to something nontechnical like the number of continents - just to start a run-of-the-mill argument like this one? You could have stuck to the vi-vs-emacs-classic or even to the BSD-vs-SysV-perennial.