164
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 54:
Line 54: + + + + + + + + + +
Discussion of continent and definitions
The footnote for Prime Ministers of Australia is in a odd place. See footnote #3.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 01:50, 26 April 2007 (EDT)conservative
The footnote for Prime Ministers of Australia is in a odd place. See footnote #3.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 01:50, 26 April 2007 (EDT)conservative
== Continental boundaries ==
I deleted a reference to Irian Jaya being a part of the continent of Australia and Phillip has footnoted that it could be considered to be a part of that continent (hence New Guinea would also.) I have found that [http://www.answers.com/topic/continent answers.com] has a nice article which gives some idea about how one might determine what is meant by "continent": "A protuberance of the Earth's crustal shell with an area of several million square miles and with sufficient elevation above neighboring depressions (the ocean basins) so that much of it is above sea level.
The great majority of maps now in use imply that the boundaries of continents are their shorelines. From the geological point of view, however, the line of demarcation between a continent and an adjacent ocean basin lies offshore, at distances ranging from a few to several hundred miles, where the gentle slope of the continental shelf changes somewhat abruptly to a steeper declivity. This change occurs at depths ranging from a few to several hundred fathoms (1 fathom = 6 feet) at different places around the periphery of various continents. See also Continental margin.
On such a basis, numerous offshore islands, including the British Isles, Greenland, Borneo, Sumatra, Java, New Guinea, Tasmania, Taiwan, Japan, and Sri Lanka, are parts of the nearby continent. Thus, there are six continents: Eurasia (Europe, China, and India are parts of this largest continent), Africa, North America, South America, Australasia (including Australia, Tasmania, and New Guinea), and Antarctica."
So, I guess in the end, it's a matter of definition and accepted models. Most Australians have grown up with the idea of the Island/Nation/Continent idea (thus discounting New Guinea) but if one takes a geological perspective then New Guinea definitely is included. From the perspective of plate techtonics and the various continental plates, India should also be included in that plate but Oceania is a separate plate and geological area. --[[User:Bilby|Bilby]] 22:44, 7 May 2007 (EDT)