Europe... how is it a continent?

Okay, I went to a public school and my degree has nothing to do with geography, so maybe that explains why this is fuzzy to me.

How exactly is it that Europe is considered it's own continent? Where exactly does the break exist between Europe and Asia? I just don't see it.

This isn't like North and South America, where yes they're connected, but it's by a very narrow strip of land so there's an obvious break. But Europe? It's "border" with Asia is it's widest point!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Europe

They made the rules at the time they were defined?

Stolen direct from the wiki:

Europe (pronunciation: /ˈjʊərəp/ YEWR-əp or /ˈjɜrəp/ YUR-əp[1]) is, by convention, considered to be one of the world's seven continents. Comprising the westernmost peninsula of Eurasia, Europe is generally divided from Asia to its east by the water divide of the Ural Mountains, the Ural River, the Caspian Sea, the Caucasus region (specification of borders) and the Black Sea to the southeast.[2] Europe is bordered by the Arctic Ocean and other bodies of water to the north, the Atlantic Ocean to the west, the Mediterranean Sea to the south, and the Black Sea and connected waterways to the southeast. Yet the borders for Europe—a concept dating back to classical antiquity—are somewhat arbitrary, as the term continent can refer to a cultural and political distinction or a physiographic one.

I always thought that was BS. I could go as few as 3 (America, Asfrica, Antarctica) or maybe 5 (Go ahead and throw Austrailia and Greenland a bone) or even 7 (seperate the two Americas and Asia from Africa based on the small land bridge principle). But under no circumstance do I see separating Asia and Europe.

screw it... 1....Pangea. Technically they are all still connected despite the water layers

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pangaea#Evidence_of_existence

The division of the landmass of Eurasia into the continents of Asia and Europe is an anomaly, as no sea separates them. An alternative view, that Eurasia is a single continent, results in a six-continent view of the world. This view is held by some geographers and is preferred in Russia, East European countries and Japan.

Greenland is less than a third the area of Australia. I'm ok with it being the largest island. Mercator projections have given people a distorted view of the world.

Agree that Europe and Asis have no business being separate continents. There are definite cultural and historical divides, but not geographic ones that make any sense. I'm also ok with North/South America as separate continents.

My list: North America South America Africa Eurasisa Antarctica Austaralia

The explination I got was that the Ural mountains seperated 2 groups of vastly different cultures, the kinds you would find if they were seperated by a large body of water. It may be a remnant of the extreme eurocentrism of the past (back when people worked the globe thing out), them not wanting to be lumped together with the rest of Asia. Geographically it's bogus, though.

I thought the Ural Mountains were the divide?

I would agree Europe is not a continent which are geneally divided by seas and/or tectonic plates:

North American Plate; South American Pate; Eurasian Pate; African Plate; Antarctic Plate; Austrailian Plate;

India is often called a "sub-continent" for this reason (Indian Plate). For whatever reason, the Philipines (Filipino Plate), Central America (Caribbean Plate) and the countries on the Arabian Plate are not.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Plates_tect2_en.svg

Europe is "traditionally" a continent because the old school European nobility didn't want to think of themselves as sharing a landmass with "slanty-eyes." (I suspect the Chinese and the Mongols had vastly different ideas about this.)

I say complete BS. Europe is a region, the continent is Eurasia. End of story.

If you take away the water, everything is attached.

Europe and asia have always only been one continent.

well... it is better than it being incontinent

My friends from Latin America (Mexico, Columbia, Peru) were all taught in school that North and South America were one continent - "America." Go figure.

failboat wrote: Europe and asia have always only been one continent.

Double-plus-good, sir!

T.J. wrote: Greenland is less than a third the area of Australia. I'm ok with it being the largest island.

Australia is a Country, Continent and the world's biggest Island.

http://www.dfat.gov.au/aib/island_continent.html

aussiesmg wrote:

T.J. wrote: Greenland is less than a third the area of Australia. I'm ok with it being the largest island.

Australia is a Country, Continent and the world's biggest Island. http://www.dfat.gov.au/aib/island_continent.html

Why isn't Eurasia the worlds biggest island?

I think we should base it solely on tectonic plates. Then you can have N. America, S. America, Africa, Eurasia, Persia, and now Indi-Australia.

Europe is moving in a different direction than Asia, so it is considered a different continent.

the silly thing is that a large portion if not all of russia is "on asia" but they are considered eastern europeans.

Ever try to spend a Euro in Iran?

I'm pretty sure some parts of Europe consider them the same continent. I know I was watching a European TV program (I think it was Motorsport Mundial) and the announcer said "All five continents". I don't remember the context or anything, but very distinctly wondering what their version was. My theory at the time was they combined Europe and Asia, and didn't count Antarctica since it is pretty much uninhabitable.

Nat Geo had a map of the world based on language once. The continents look very different when you split them by English, French, Spanish, etc.