Page 1 of 3 [ 41 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next

Lazar_Kaganovich
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 27 Dec 2014
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 412

12 Apr 2015, 6:24 pm

That's right! Europe is actually a peninsula as there is no geological boundary between Europe and Asia. Before Peter the great the boundary was the Russia border. But he decided to extend the boundary to the Ural mountains and named the western-most part of his nation "European Russia". So why do Euroweenies still cling to the antiquated idea that is is? Asia is also not a continent. Thy both are part of a single continent which happens to be the largest on Earth: EURASIA.

I guess they just wanna feel speshul and can't bear the idea that they live on the same continent with people who ain't white like them.

After all, science > history+culture.



Kiprobalhato
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator

User avatar

Joined: 25 Mar 2014
Age: 23
Gender: Female
Posts: 29,119
Location: מתחת לעננים

12 Apr 2015, 6:30 pm

k

what about the urals, the caucasus, bosphorus? caspian sea? those are some of the most concrete geographical items that have marked the boundary, (and it has shifted many times, the don and volga rivers were also used in part) though nowadays of course that leaves some states divided between two. like georgia, kazakhstan, turkey.

the greek north aegean islands belong to greece politically though they lie on the asian continental shelf. why do you bring up whiteness?


_________________
הייתי צוללת עכשיו למים
הכי, הכי עמוקים
לא לשמוע כלום
לא לדעת כלום
וזה הכל אהובי, זה הכל.


Lazar_Kaganovich
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 27 Dec 2014
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 412

12 Apr 2015, 7:07 pm

Kiprobalhato wrote:
k

what about the urals, the caucasus, bosphorus? caspian sea? those are some of the most concrete geographical items that have marked the boundary, (and it has shifted many times, the don and volga rivers were also used in part) though nowadays of course that leaves some states divided between two. like georgia, kazakhstan, turkey.

the greek north aegean islands belong to greece politically though they lie on the asian continental shelf. why do you bring up whiteness?



Um, the Aegean islands are on the EURASIAN continental shelf. There is a Eurasian plate. There is no separate European continental plate. And furthermore, the boundaries you speak of, particularly the eastern divide between Europe and Asia, are entirely arbitrary and historical. That being said, there is no rational reason why Europe or Asia should retain their status as distinct continents when they are on the same tectonic plate as well as being connected by land.



naturalplastic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Aug 2010
Age: 65
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,604
Location: temperate zone

13 Apr 2015, 12:26 pm

Yes, and no.

I consider Europe to be "sub continent".

As geographical unit, as a geological unit, and as a human socio/cultural unit, Europe is comparable to the "Indian Subcontinent" (India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, and number of smaller countries on both the mainland of Asia, and some island nations.

But yes (like the Indian Subcontinent), it really is part of the Eurasian landmass.

Although Europe WAS a seperate landmass at one point in geological time. Most of what is now Europe (including the European part of Russia) was a seperate piece of land. It wandered around as its own small drifting continent. It then slammed into Asia and thrusted up the mountain range that is now the Urals (now considered the boundry between Europe and Asia in Russia).

Back in the days of the dinosaurs the Urals were as big as the Alps. Much later Italy broke off of Africa, drifted across the Mediterranean and slammed into the belly of Europe forcing up the Alps. The Urals (like the Applachians) are now old and worn down and not spanking new and tall as the Alps.

At one time the southern shores of Asia were full of beaches upon which marine mammals frolicked, including the ancestors of the Whales. But then India broke away from its home in the southern hemisphere. India was just one slice of the bigger pie that included Madagascar and southern Africa, and Antarctica. India scooted north across the Indian Ocean, and slammed into the belly of Asia forcing up the Himalayas. And now they find the fossils of various strange mammals in various stages of evolution between four footed land mammal to zero footed whale in the Pakistani foothills of the Himalayas quite FAR from any ocean.

At least Europeans are aware that the boundry between Asia and Europe runs through Russia. Most Americans dont know which continent Russia is supposed to be part of( or is it its own continent or what? Gosh I dunno.) and dont even have a concept of "European Russia" vs "Russian parts of Asia".

A local free newspaper (not THE major paper, just a local rag) has a question and answer column for readers. One reader asked "why is it that the Russians didnt discover America first because the tip of Russia is so close to Alaska?".

The reader's question was based upon the assumption that the modern political boundries you see on maps today are the same as the boundries that existed in 1492- which is a gigantically dumb assumption.

The reader didnt grasp the concept that the Empire of the Czars didnt even reach the Ural Mountains until 1580, and further back (when Columbus sailed in 1492) Russia wasnt even a unified state yet (even the part within Europe). And that even in 1580 the Eastern boundry of Russia in the Urals was twice the distance to Alaska as the width of the Atlantic Ocean that Columbus had to cross. The reason the Russians didnt discover America was 1)the Russian state didnt exist yet, and (2) When the Russian state did form it was twice as remote from America as Spain (or any country on the west coast of Europe) so they were last place you would expect to "discover America".

But if that wasnt enough the guy who wrote the answer column (who has to play the role of being the fount of all wisdom to write the column) proceeded to answer the guy's question with same idiotic assumption that the modern boundries we see today on the map are the same boundry lines that existed in 1492! He wrote some nonsense about how if you were on the tip of Siberia and saw the tip of Alaska the tip of Alaska wouldnt be very inviting so "you cant blame the Russians for not discovering America". I wrote the guy a letter complaining about his incompetence in answering that question. Never got a response.



genesis529
Blue Jay
Blue Jay

User avatar

Joined: 12 Mar 2015
Age: 34
Posts: 88
Location: Georgia, USA

13 Apr 2015, 12:35 pm

Europe and Asia are seperated by thousands of miles of wasteland, in which nothing of historical importance has ever happened and never will.



naturalplastic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Aug 2010
Age: 65
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,604
Location: temperate zone

13 Apr 2015, 12:44 pm

genesis529 wrote:
Europe and Asia are seperated by thousands of miles of wasteland, in which nothing of historical importance has ever happened and never will.


Not really true. But even if it were true its irrelevent. What makes a continent and continent is that it is a landmass bounded by water. Europe and Asia are not seperated by water the way Europe is seperated from Africa, or from America, by water.



Basso53
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2014
Age: 67
Gender: Male
Posts: 619
Location: Massachusetts USA

13 Apr 2015, 12:45 pm

Lazar_Kaganovich wrote:
That's right! Europe is actually a peninsula as there is no geological boundary between Europe and Asia. Before Peter the great the boundary was the Russia border. But he decided to extend the boundary to the Ural mountains and named the western-most part of his nation "European Russia". So why do Euroweenies still cling to the antiquated idea that is is? Asia is also not a continent. Thy both are part of a single continent which happens to be the largest on Earth: EURASIA.

I guess they just wanna feel speshul and can't bear the idea that they live on the same continent with people who ain't white like them.

After all, science > history+culture.


You could say the same thing about North and South America, and Africa. Unless you consider two over-sized ditches dug by humans>natural boundaries.

So you have America, Eurasiafrica, and two glorified islands in Australia and Antarctica. :lol:


_________________
AQ 34
Your Aspie score: 104 of 200
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 116 of 200
You seem to have both Aspie and neurotypical traits


Lazar_Kaganovich
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 27 Dec 2014
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 412

13 Apr 2015, 2:01 pm

naturalplastic wrote:
Yes, and no.

I consider Europe to be "sub continent".

As geographical unit, as a geological unit, and as a human socio/cultural unit, Europe is comparable to the "Indian Subcontinent" (India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, and number of smaller countries on both the mainland of Asia, and some island nations.

But yes (like the Indian Subcontinent), it really is part of the Eurasian landmass.





Europe is not comparable to India as a subcontinent. India is called a subcontinent because it lies on a separate tectonic plate(the Indo-Australian plate)and not the Eurasian plate. Do you have any evidence that Europe was once geologically separated from Asia?



Lazar_Kaganovich
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 27 Dec 2014
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 412

13 Apr 2015, 2:05 pm

Basso53 wrote:
Lazar_Kaganovich wrote:
That's right! Europe is actually a peninsula as there is no geological boundary between Europe and Asia. Before Peter the great the boundary was the Russia border. But he decided to extend the boundary to the Ural mountains and named the western-most part of his nation "European Russia". So why do Euroweenies still cling to the antiquated idea that is is? Asia is also not a continent. Thy both are part of a single continent which happens to be the largest on Earth: EURASIA.

I guess they just wanna feel speshul and can't bear the idea that they live on the same continent with people who ain't white like them.

After all, science > history+culture.


You could say the same thing about North and South America, and Africa. Unless you consider two over-sized ditches dug by humans>natural boundaries.

So you have America, Eurasiafrica, and two glorified islands in Australia and Antarctica. :lol:



Wrong

North and South America lie on 2 separate tectonic plates so they actually ARE distinct continents. Much of central America south of Mexico to just south of the Panamanian southern boundary lie on the Caribbean plate. Antarctica also rests upon its own plate so it is indeed a continent and not simply an island(unlike Greenland which is on the North American plate).

genesis529 wrote:
Europe and Asia are seperated by thousands of miles of wasteland, in which nothing of historical importance has ever happened and never will.


Also Wrong.

The Ural mountains are not wasteland because wasteland refers to land that cannot support vegetation and has a shortage of available surface water. As for the Caucasus mountains, you really don't know much about history do ya?



beneficii
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 May 2005
Age: 36
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,241

13 Apr 2015, 2:11 pm

naturalplastic wrote:
genesis529 wrote:
Europe and Asia are seperated by thousands of miles of wasteland, in which nothing of historical importance has ever happened and never will.


Not really true. But even if it were true its irrelevent. What makes a continent and continent is that it is a landmass bounded by water. Europe and Asia are not seperated by water the way Europe is seperated from Africa, or from America, by water.


Yeah. And isn't that person aware of the various Turkic peoples who live in that supposed "wasteland," better known as the "Eurasian steppe." Turkic peoples I know invaded both China and Europe. The Huns I believe are considered to be "proto-Turkic," and they certainly left their mark on Europe in the 5th century. When the Mongol Empire came into Europe, they relied on a major confederation between the Mongol and Turkic peoples. Then some of the Turkic people made their way into Anatolia, pushing the Byzantine Empire back. The Turkic peoples who would come to dominate Anatolia and southeastern Thrace (which includes Istanbul/Constantinople as well as Edirne/Hadrianople) would go onto being known as Turkish, a people of Turkey. The Ottoman Empire founded by them came to control virtually all of the Balkan peninsula.


_________________
"You have a responsibility to consider all sides of a problem and a responsibility to make a judgment and a responsibility to care for all involved." --Ian Danskin


Lazar_Kaganovich
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 27 Dec 2014
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 412

13 Apr 2015, 2:58 pm

beneficii wrote:
naturalplastic wrote:
genesis529 wrote:
Europe and Asia are seperated by thousands of miles of wasteland, in which nothing of historical importance has ever happened and never will.


Not really true. But even if it were true its irrelevent. What makes a continent and continent is that it is a landmass bounded by water. Europe and Asia are not seperated by water the way Europe is seperated from Africa, or from America, by water.


Yeah. And isn't that person aware of the various Turkic peoples who live in that supposed "wasteland," better known as the "Eurasian steppe." Turkic peoples I know invaded both China and Europe. The Huns I believe are considered to be "proto-Turkic," and they certainly left their mark on Europe in the 5th century. When the Mongol Empire came into Europe, they relied on a major confederation between the Mongol and Turkic peoples. Then some of the Turkic people made their way into Anatolia, pushing the Byzantine Empire back. The Turkic peoples who would come to dominate Anatolia and southeastern Thrace (which includes Istanbul/Constantinople as well as Edirne/Hadrianople) would go onto being known as Turkish, a people of Turkey. The Ottoman Empire founded by them came to control virtually all of the Balkan peninsula.



Yup! American edumucation at it's finest: Don't know jack about world history except for Jesus n Columbus.



sly279
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Dec 2013
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Posts: 16,181
Location: US

13 Apr 2015, 4:40 pm

Lazar_Kaganovich wrote:
beneficii wrote:
naturalplastic wrote:
genesis529 wrote:
Europe and Asia are seperated by thousands of miles of wasteland, in which nothing of historical importance has ever happened and never will.


Not really true. But even if it were true its irrelevent. What makes a continent and continent is that it is a landmass bounded by water. Europe and Asia are not seperated by water the way Europe is seperated from Africa, or from America, by water.


Yeah. And isn't that person aware of the various Turkic peoples who live in that supposed "wasteland," better known as the "Eurasian steppe." Turkic peoples I know invaded both China and Europe. The Huns I believe are considered to be "proto-Turkic," and they certainly left their mark on Europe in the 5th century. When the Mongol Empire came into Europe, they relied on a major confederation between the Mongol and Turkic peoples. Then some of the Turkic people made their way into Anatolia, pushing the Byzantine Empire back. The Turkic peoples who would come to dominate Anatolia and southeastern Thrace (which includes Istanbul/Constantinople as well as Edirne/Hadrianople) would go onto being known as Turkish, a people of Turkey. The Ottoman Empire founded by them came to control virtually all of the Balkan peninsula.



Yup! American edumucation at it's finest: Don't know jack about world history except for Jesus n Columbus.


where did you go to school?

never taught Jesus, and I don't think american schools even teach columbus now that they say hes a genocidal person responsible for the death of millions of natives.

I have other reasons for not liking the american education but its quite different from yours. history in public school covered a lot about ancient times, then revolutionary war, skip to ww1 for a week, month on ww2. skip to viet nam spend time there, then skip to talking about how great clinton was. though now I suspect they talk about how great obama is.

college is so left biased. but world history and different areas are covered more, ww2 actually played a tiny part compared to high school. theres a class that digs deeply into any part of history though. so if one wants to learn more about a certain part and place they can. I don't think grad - high school education should dig deeply into world history. theres only so much time and the school system is meant to get people ready for adult life and careers, not to have everyone come out with a PHD in history.

even if that' would been a more fun experience for me.



kraftiekortie
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 71,570
Location: Queens, NYC

13 Apr 2015, 5:40 pm

I would say that, technically, Europe is not a "continent." It comprises probably 1/4-1/5 of the Eurasian landmass.

Geopolitically, though (whether it's fair or unfair), it is a full-fledged continent.

I would agree with the poster who stated that Europe, in reality, is merely a "sub-continent," like India is a "sub-continent."



Lazar_Kaganovich
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 27 Dec 2014
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 412

13 Apr 2015, 6:02 pm

kraftiekortie wrote:
I would say that, technically, Europe is not a "continent." It comprises probably 1/4-1/5 of the Eurasian landmass.

Geopolitically, though (whether it's fair or unfair), it is a full-fledged continent.

I would agree with the poster who stated that Europe, in reality, is merely a "sub-continent," like India is a "sub-continent."


Well no, it is not even a sub-continent. A subcontinent is a region of a (larger)continent which lies on a separate plate from the rest of the continental landmass. There is no body of water between India and the rest of Eurasia but there IS a geological boundary(in terms of an underground separation between the Eurasian plate and the Indo-Australian plate).

Europe is not only connected to Asia by thousands of miles of land, but it lies on the same tectonic plate. So in short, it is a region, but not a continent or sub-continent.



kraftiekortie
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 71,570
Location: Queens, NYC

13 Apr 2015, 6:08 pm

I can't dispute that.



beneficii
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 May 2005
Age: 36
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,241

13 Apr 2015, 6:16 pm

I think studying the Turkic peoples is interesting. For example, the center of the Huns power was right around modern-day Hungary, and Attila the Hun's palace was located on the Danube, not too far from modern-day Budapest. One interesting finding is that some of the cauldrons found near Budapest greatly resemble some of the ones found in Inner Mongolia, China.


_________________
"You have a responsibility to consider all sides of a problem and a responsibility to make a judgment and a responsibility to care for all involved." --Ian Danskin