That outline is like the entire continental shelf, or all the area where the glaciers are directly over rock (as opposed to having ocean in between), or something like that.
But if the ice weren’t there, not all of it would actually be above sea level:
Might actually be smaller than Australia if the ice were gone, give or take things like sea level rise and isostatic rebound.
I may be mistaken here, but I think the concept of a “continental shelf” is pretty well defined geologically. That is: Outside a land mass, the ocean floor extends a certain distance before dropping off to the deep ocean floor. An island would be a piece of land that sticks out of the sea from this continental shelf, while the “continent” includes the entire shelf, and all the land masses that stick out of the ocean on that shelf.
Of course, this seems to break down a bit for e.g. the Europe/Asia divide (and probably a lot more), but the concept of “continents” vs. “islands” can make sense geologically, although the “continents” are then different from the geopolitical borders ones we usually talk about.
That definition however does some weird things like saying that Tokyo and parts of Siberia are in North America, but Panama and Los Angeles aren’t.
A continent is mostly just a social convention for a bigass geographic and geological structure that is above sea level and largely geologically and culturally separated. North and South America are connected by a land bridge, but that’s really recent in evolutionary time and it’s a real pain in the ass to cross. Europe and Asia are historically separated by the Ural mountains, but it’s hard to look at them in modern day and say “these are two distinct landmasses” especially if you’re saying India isn’t, but historically getting from Europe to what’s worth going to in Asia has involved crossing the Mediterranean much like getting to Africa or sailing around Africa in the early modern period. Australia is a giant landmass with not much else around as is Antarctica.
Continents is a human made construct that’s later rationalized with tectonic plates and other criteria. Basically, people around the Mediterranean Sea divided the Mediterranean Coast into 3 parts and later extended this concept.
If you go by the geological definition, Australia is a continent, as is Zealandia. That’s right, New Zealand has equal geological footing with the entirety of Eurasia.
Not all continents, no. Islands are bodies of land surrounded by water on all sides, no? Wouldn’t Antarctica and Australia then qualify by that definition?
https://niy.ai/worldmap lets you reproject Mercator to put any landmass you want in the middle by clicking on it, but it doesn’t have that overlay thing.
I mean it’s greatly exaggerated on Mercator but it’s definitely not tiny.
It’s bigger than Australia
Also bigger than Texas
It’s just like they say: “everything’s bigger than Texas!”
Fake map north should be pointing away from Antarctica dumbass. Read a book.
That outline is like the entire continental shelf, or all the area where the glaciers are directly over rock (as opposed to having ocean in between), or something like that.
But if the ice weren’t there, not all of it would actually be above sea level:
Might actually be smaller than Australia if the ice were gone, give or take things like sea level rise and isostatic rebound.
If the ice weren’t there a lot of the other continents would also be below sea level
TIL that Antarctica is an archipelago.
You’re an archipelago
Does that mean Australia is not the biggest island
Are continents islands?
I may be mistaken here, but I think the concept of a “continental shelf” is pretty well defined geologically. That is: Outside a land mass, the ocean floor extends a certain distance before dropping off to the deep ocean floor. An island would be a piece of land that sticks out of the sea from this continental shelf, while the “continent” includes the entire shelf, and all the land masses that stick out of the ocean on that shelf.
Of course, this seems to break down a bit for e.g. the Europe/Asia divide (and probably a lot more), but the concept of “continents” vs. “islands” can make sense geologically, although the “continents” are then different from the geopolitical borders ones we usually talk about.
That definition however does some weird things like saying that Tokyo and parts of Siberia are in North America, but Panama and Los Angeles aren’t.
A continent is mostly just a social convention for a bigass geographic and geological structure that is above sea level and largely geologically and culturally separated. North and South America are connected by a land bridge, but that’s really recent in evolutionary time and it’s a real pain in the ass to cross. Europe and Asia are historically separated by the Ural mountains, but it’s hard to look at them in modern day and say “these are two distinct landmasses” especially if you’re saying India isn’t, but historically getting from Europe to what’s worth going to in Asia has involved crossing the Mediterranean much like getting to Africa or sailing around Africa in the early modern period. Australia is a giant landmass with not much else around as is Antarctica.
There is no agreed upon definition or set of continents globally
It might as well be a made up word
the just be making up words now
All words are made up
no i’m doesn’t
What will they think of next?
ook
All words are made up words…
By definition, a continent and an island are mutually exclusive. Nothing can be both.
Australia isn’t a continent either. It’s in the continent of Oceania, which includes New Zealand.
Antarctica is a continent in its own right. It’s not a country and not a nation.
The Australia thing is something we were taught in high school.
I think I remember being told Greenland was the largest island, while Australia was a continent
Something to do with tectonic plates
Continents is a human made construct that’s later rationalized with tectonic plates and other criteria. Basically, people around the Mediterranean Sea divided the Mediterranean Coast into 3 parts and later extended this concept.
Yeah, but so is an island. It’s all human constructs. we see patterns and make up sounds for them.
Yes of cause
If you go by the geological definition, Australia is a continent, as is Zealandia. That’s right, New Zealand has equal geological footing with the entirety of Eurasia.
Probably why they keep getting left off maps, jealousy.
Not all continents, no. Islands are bodies of land surrounded by water on all sides, no? Wouldn’t Antarctica and Australia then qualify by that definition?
I mean every landmass is surrounded on all sides by water though
But most of the land that are considered continents are connected to one or kore other land, and thus couldn’t be defined as an island.
Though, after reading a few other comments, it seems the definition of what makes a continent a continent is apparently subject to debate.
~This is why we can’t have nice things.~
Apparently Greenland is considered the largest island. The difference between a continent and island is a little arbitrary.
Nice. What did you use for that one?
https://niy.ai/worldmap lets you reproject Mercator to put any landmass you want in the middle by clicking on it, but it doesn’t have that overlay thing.
https://thetruesize.com/
Hence “most other continents”
Yeah it’s smaller but not tiny