Well yeah, but if this is the continent why the long legs to signify ownership? This justifiably confused me into thinking this was a political graphic incorrectly labeled as Europe instead of EU.
So I suppose this graphic really isn’t showing anything at all, as it’s neither politically or geographically accurate.
Guys, Europe is a continent, based on a tectonic plate or some shit, which partially includes Russia and Turkey.
But this graph is a mess because it somehow combines aspects of both geography and political affiliation.
It contains the geographical definition of the continent, and then it stops making sense. French Guyana is included because it’s part of France. But Siberia isn’t, despite being part of Russia.
And parts of Antarctica are included, despite not being part of any country at all.
Oops, UK shouldn’t be in there 😉
Look here gammon, we only left the EU. We didn’t move the Island to a different continent.
Well yeah, but if this is the continent why the long legs to signify ownership? This justifiably confused me into thinking this was a political graphic incorrectly labeled as Europe instead of EU.
So I suppose this graphic really isn’t showing anything at all, as it’s neither politically or geographically accurate.
Have you tried?
Neither should Russia and a whole other things by that measure
Or the whole of Russia and Turkey.
Guys, Europe is a continent, based on a tectonic plate or some shit, which partially includes Russia and Turkey.
But this graph is a mess because it somehow combines aspects of both geography and political affiliation.
It contains the geographical definition of the continent, and then it stops making sense. French Guyana is included because it’s part of France. But Siberia isn’t, despite being part of Russia.
And parts of Antarctica are included, despite not being part of any country at all.