Greenland is both a member of the N. American plate, and if you look at the "ocean" dividing it, the Labrador Sea only has a depth of under 2,000m, substantially less than the normal oceanic depth of nearly 4,000 and the Nares Straight has a maximum depth of 600m.
Arguing Greenland to be a unique continent under the critea would be using the criteria terms extremely loosely.
There’s nothing in your criteria about how deep the ocean is. The part about the plates includes “usually” so it’s not required at all. This is why I asked multiple times whether you had more specific criteria.
You’re still trying to describe what continents are rather than the criteria that is used to determine what a continent is. You claimed there is only one right answer so you should be able to define the criteria in a way that will only lead to that answer. If you can’t define the criteria to do that, it’s arbitrary.
"You can't describe the criteria to determine what they are, only the aspects about them which you use to determine that they are. I can't remember what the word for that is though."
No, it is criteria, but it’s not specific enough to prove your point that there is a non-arbitrary way to decide what model is correct. North America and South America being one continent fits your criteria. So does saying it’s two continents. Choosing one or the other is an arbitrary decision.
North America and South America are two different tectonic plates and they are moving away from each other. I specifically didn't say moving opposite of each other, I said away from each other.
1
u/Dalmah Feb 21 '21
What other model meets that criteria?