URBANmedias

If Europe and Asia are not different continents based on the tectonic plates that they both share, would that mean that Russia is in a fact a part of Europe. Wouldn't its ties be closely link to that of Asia, because growing up in school, I was taught that Russia was closely related to the Asian continent than it was to Europe. Though Russia is sometimes perceived as being its own continent, I wonder what this discovery will mean for them long term.

The article states that the idea of separate continents comes from European scholars whom wanted to give more definition to there culture and area of the world, essentially there region. I wonder if this could be said in regards to the inhabitant East of the Ural Mountains. Did they want a form of boundary to represent and distinguish there region? None the less, we live in the west so the western perspective is what guides us. 

Even if there never was a Europe and an Asia, there would still be land disputes as to whom has claim to which region/area of land. On a global perspective its viewed as Europe and Asia but when one takes a closer look its simply country and country... not continent and continent. This article is revealing the importance of Eurasia, how it truly does exist. A quasi boundary is not going to separate the once "two continents" rather nothing separates the continents, its all part of Eurasia. 

A neat part of the article is how the writer states recognizing the land mass as two continents is old and out of date. Its basically wrong and non-intelligent. I believe this is important and is something that needs to be recognized on a national scale (here in the United States). Personally I've always recognized the realm as "Eurasia." I now feel more intelligent for doing so! How do people in Europe and with this being said Asia, feel about this more reformed definition of the supercontinent? Do they even recognize it as true? Perhaps they realize there are more important issues at hand like current  countries  disputed and invaded borders.

None the less there is disputed boundaries on a more micro level, when compared to the continent versus continent scheme. For example Russian backed separatists have claimed a portion of Eastern Ukraine. Do people actually see this as Asians expanding into Europe or rather a transcontinental country (Russia) expanding itself more westward. The importance here lies in the disputed country boundaries, not continental boundaries, yet one cannot not deny the significance of the  "continental boundary" which some people do believe in. But the core of the matter is the country to country ratio. 

This was interesting to read because I don't associate the two till I can visually see it.  Then to further call it Eurasia makes sense as well.  There is a population that are considered Asian Russians.  I did a study on this culture and I couldn't believe there were Asian Russians. This sounds crazy.  It would make sense for cross cultures in this region.