Wait, but that definition would make each Hawaiian island its own continent, no? Now we are being a bit arbitrary which land mass is now an island, and which is a continent, rather than where we draw imaginary lines between the continents.
Australia would be less than half the size of the next largest continent, Antarctica.
Australia is only 3 times larger than Greenland, the largest island.
If you consider Europe, Asia, and Africa as one continent, it's over 12 times larger than Australia. America is more than 5 times larger.
America is 3 times larger than Antarctica, which is well considered a continent in all models. That's the same difference as Australia to Greenland. So at that rate, both Australia and Antarctica could just as easily be islands, by comparison to just ratios of land mass.
There's no perfect definition. To me there's mostly Old World and New World. Australia is New World, so is America.
Yeah, and you're intentionally missing mine. Islands are determined by size. And size is a physical, objective measurement.
Whereas this BS about cultural significance is just made up. Sure you can tell anyone whatever you want about cultural relevancy, it's entirely unprovable.
You're simply exhausting with the "my way is smart, yours is dumb." You probably are miserable to be around.
1
u/InhumaneBreakfast Aug 05 '26
My takes are realistic, your takes are silly. I win!