5 ms·
I think the criterion is "mostly contiguous region of continental crust", in which case the separation between Africa and Asia might separate them, and the sepa
by scythe 9y ago
I think the criterion is "mostly contiguous region of continental crust", in which case the separation between Africa and Asia might separate them, and the separation between the Americas similarly might; according to purely topological definitions there are precisely four continents (Americas, Eurasia/Africa, Australia, Antarctica and maybe Greenland). Tectonic plates don't correspond to very much from a geographic perspective -- Baja California would become two new continents, one of which groups it with the South Island of New Zealand.
- ThrustVectoring 9y agoThe continental distinctions as they are is pretty much geopolitics. There's no passable land route between North and South America, because the connection is through thick jungle. Similarly, pretty much nobody wants to go through the Ural mountains to go overland from Europe to Asia. Since little overland commerce or credible overland invasion routes exist between continents, they can be thought of mostly independently.
- ulucs 9y agoWhy pass through Ural mountains when you could just pass through a bridge?