good man
i just wanted to know what they really tasted like
urrp
i didnt mean to redefine them
i am sure columbia still owns new york
& i know i wasnt neat on the rocks in iceland
but cis ural kazakstan must be urope
urrp
& its trans ural bigger half must be asia
exactly like russia
& sort of like turkey
which are just easier to swallow because more traditionally split in 2
still the only officially true & complete menu of the continents i ever
heard of was the one just offered here by our own maitre d in residence
pontiff max of canada
as for that multipunctually inedible antarctica pie thing
i believe it was true before 1959 that the south pole was a very wild
6country point with some overlaps & even some everyones land thrown in for
good measure
in fips the resulting hexapoint
if thats what it was
sexipoint is probably truer
might have been arascifrnzuk & in iso arauclfrgbnz
but all 6 of the countries involved
argentina
australia
chile
france
new zealand
united kingdom
then or subsequently did agree to suspend indefinitely their sovereign
claims not only to the south pole but all antarctica
so 90south lat is at least for the time being a legal no country point
by contrast 90north lat is claimed
in part by russia
& in part by some but not all elements of the canadian government
& where & if so then evidently in the name of the british crown
since it is maritime under the ice in that case
so there is some basis for calling the north pole a bi country or even a
tri country point
but it would still take a far fetch in either case
even by max himself
>
>
>No one here is going to redefine the continents. I still think
>it is a more interesting question to find out the boundries of
>the actual ones.
>
>Questions like are Iceland and Columbia in North America and
>is Kazakstan in Europe are far more interesting, IMO. (I've
>also straddled the plate rift in Iceland, BTW :-))
>
>A while back I did a search to find the "official" definition
>of Europe. Interesting is the nummber of different "official"
>opinions I found. Even the best of them were vague in the
>critial area south of the Urals, among other problems. I even
>found a couple different places claiming to be the "geographical
>center of Europe". I never did find anything with an ISO or the
>like stamp on it though. Does anyone here know if there is
>an "official" definition of the continents and who the
>"office" is?
>
>Failing that, playing around with the boundries of Europe can
>be quite interesting on all sides, especially under the
>(necessary IMO) assumption that you use solely geophysical
>as opposed to geopolitical features.
>
>Finally, in regards to multinational junctions on the continents,
>has the UN (or someone) formally decided that there are no
>national boundries in Antarctica? Last I heard, and it was
>a while ago, Americans did not recogise this, but that does not
>mean they do not exist (with a really big multinational point
>at the south pole) because alot of countries _did_ recognize
>them. I know TCC recognised this as well. Like I said, though,
>it was quite a long time ago when I last looked into this.
>
>Cheers,
>Randy
>
>To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>BoundaryPoint-unsubscribe@egroups.com
>
>