[Taxacom] Supposed new continent

John Grehan calabar.john at gmail.com
Fri Feb 17 21:11:05 CST 2017


In agreement on these observations. And one cannot even appeal to monophyly
for Zealandia either by geology or biogeography. And Iceland also has
evidence of a continental block beneath. Like naming taxa after prominent
controversial people, naming continents is a bit of a game, but one that
works for gaining public attention. Probably these 'continental' names will
gain formalization if someone sufficiently influential publishes them part
as widely accepted renditions and then they will be added to the
innumerable names of things that students have to learn. Maybe better to
sink the names along with the continents :)

John Grehan

On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 9:29 PM, Kenneth Kinman <kinman at hotmail.com> wrote:

> According to this definition, is Europe really a separate continent?  More
> like a subcontinent or very large peninsula of Eurasia.  Even those who
> call Europe a separate continent can't seem to agree where it leaves off
> and Asia begins.
>
> As for Zealandia, as well as another new "continent" called Mauritia,
> perhaps microcontinent might be in order (or follow the astronomers lead
> and call them "dwarf" continents).  Would Iceland also qualify?  Where do
> you draw the line?
>
>                ---------------Ken
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Taxacom <taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu> on behalf of John
> Grehan <calabar.john at gmail.com>
> *Sent:* Friday, February 17, 2017 9:54 AM
> *To:* taxacom
> *Subject:* [Taxacom] Supposed new continent
>
> .......
>
> Researchers said Zealandia was a distinct geological entity and met all the
> criteria applied to Earth's seven other continents -- elevation above the
> surrounding area, distinctive geology, a well-defined area and a crust much
> thicker than that found on the ocean floor.
>
> ...
>
>
>
>
>


More information about the Taxacom mailing list