this post was submitted on 22 Mar 2026
398 points (98.5% liked)

memes

20618 readers
2492 users here now

Community rules

1. Be civilNo trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour

2. No politicsThis is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world

3. No recent repostsCheck for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month

4. No botsNo bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins

5. No Spam/Ads/AI SlopNo advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live. We also consider AI slop to be spam in this community and is subject to removal.

A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment

Sister communities

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
all 48 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] bdonvr@thelemmy.club 104 points 1 day ago (6 children)

I mean it's greatly exaggerated on Mercator but it's definitely not tiny.

It's bigger than Australia

[–] Fleur_@aussie.zone 42 points 1 day ago

Fake map north should be pointing away from Antarctica dumbass. Read a book.

[–] grue@lemmy.world 19 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

That outline is like the entire continental shelf, or all the area where the glaciers are directly over rock (as opposed to having ocean in between), or something like that.

But if the ice weren't there, not all of it would actually be above sea level:

Might actually be smaller than Australia if the ice were gone, give or take things like sea level rise and isostatic rebound.

[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago

If the ice weren't there a lot of the other continents would also be below sea level

[–] marcos@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

TIL that Antarctica is an archipelago.

[–] prettybunnys@piefed.social 2 points 1 day ago

You’re an archipelago

[–] ryannathans@aussie.zone 16 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Does that mean Australia is not the biggest island

[–] bdonvr@thelemmy.club 26 points 1 day ago (5 children)
[–] ryannathans@aussie.zone 25 points 1 day ago (2 children)

There is no agreed upon definition or set of continents globally

It might as well be a made up word

[–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 12 points 1 day ago (2 children)

the just be making up words now

[–] MrVilliam@sh.itjust.works 9 points 1 day ago (1 children)

no i'm doesn't

[–] Town@lemmy.zip 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

What will they think of next?

[–] ExcessShiv@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 day ago

All words are made up words...

[–] thebestaquaman@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I may be mistaken here, but I think the concept of a "continental shelf" is pretty well defined geologically. That is: Outside a land mass, the ocean floor extends a certain distance before dropping off to the deep ocean floor. An island would be a piece of land that sticks out of the sea from this continental shelf, while the "continent" includes the entire shelf, and all the land masses that stick out of the ocean on that shelf.

Of course, this seems to break down a bit for e.g. the Europe/Asia divide (and probably a lot more), but the concept of "continents" vs. "islands" can make sense geologically, although the "continents" are then different from the geopolitical borders ones we usually talk about.

[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

That definition however does some weird things like saying that Tokyo and parts of Siberia are in North America, but Panama and Los Angeles aren't.

A continent is mostly just a social convention for a bigass geographic and geological structure that is above sea level and largely geologically and culturally separated. North and South America are connected by a land bridge, but that's really recent in evolutionary time and it's a real pain in the ass to cross. Europe and Asia are historically separated by the Ural mountains, but it's hard to look at them in modern day and say "these are two distinct landmasses" especially if you're saying India isn't, but historically getting from Europe to what's worth going to in Asia has involved crossing the Mediterranean much like getting to Africa or sailing around Africa in the early modern period. Australia is a giant landmass with not much else around as is Antarctica.

[–] damnthefilibuster@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The Australia thing is something we were taught in high school.

[–] bdonvr@thelemmy.club 13 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

I think I remember being told Greenland was the largest island, while Australia was a continent

Something to do with tectonic plates

[–] lugal@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Continents is a human made construct that's later rationalized with tectonic plates and other criteria. Basically, people around the Mediterranean Sea divided the Mediterranean Coast into 3 parts and later extended this concept.

[–] JayDee@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Yeah, but so is an island. It's all human constructs. we see patterns and make up sounds for them.

[–] lugal@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 day ago

Yes of cause

[–] nightlily@leminal.space 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

If you go by the geological definition, Australia is a continent, as is Zealandia. That’s right, New Zealand has equal geological footing with the entirety of Eurasia.

[–] Zorque@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago

Probably why they keep getting left off maps, jealousy.

[–] pHr34kY@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

By definition, a continent and an island are mutually exclusive. Nothing can be both.

Australia isn't a continent either. It's in the continent of Oceania, which includes New Zealand.

Antarctica is a continent in its own right. It's not a country and not a nation.

[–] dohpaz42@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Not all continents, no. Islands are bodies of land surrounded by water on all sides, no? Wouldn’t Antarctica and Australia then qualify by that definition?

[–] bdonvr@thelemmy.club 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I mean every landmass is surrounded on all sides by water though

[–] dohpaz42@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago

But most of the land that are considered continents are connected to one or kore other land, and thus couldn’t be defined as an island.

Though, after reading a few other comments, it seems the definition of what makes a continent a continent is apparently subject to debate.

~This is why we can’t have nice things.~

Apparently Greenland is considered the largest island. The difference between a continent and island is a little arbitrary.

[–] ptu@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] ivanafterall@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

It's just like they say: "everything's bigger than Texas!"

[–] lugal@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Hence "most other continents"

[–] bdonvr@thelemmy.club 1 points 1 day ago

Yeah it's smaller but not tiny

[–] skisnow@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Nice. What did you use for that one?

https://niy.ai/worldmap lets you reproject Mercator to put any landmass you want in the middle by clicking on it, but it doesn't have that overlay thing.

[–] skisnow@lemmy.ca 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Fun fact, Mercator would in principle be even more distorted than it is, but almost every map that uses it crops at least the top and bottom 5 degrees to hide it. Mercator's original cropped to 66°S - 80°N, which shifts Europe towards the middle.

[–] thebestaquaman@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Another fun-fact: The Mercator projection was, at its inception, the first map that could be used for long-distance sea navigation over the mediterranean and Atlantic in the sense that axes are scaled such that courses plotted on the map actually match the compass course you need to follow to get somewhere. This also happens to be the reason it became popular, and the reason it was made, rather than the commonly quoted reason of "making Europe big at the expense of things closer to the equator".

[–] katkit@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

And Mercator means merchant in Latin. I thought that was because of the projection's purpose, but turns out that the inventer's name was actually Mercator, which was a latinisation of his Flemish birthname Kremer (meaning grocer or merchant).

[–] thebestaquaman@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

Now that is a fun-fact! I knew the guy was called Mercator, but didn't know about the Latin origin, and can definitely see the origin of the name spreading as a misconception.

[–] damnthefilibuster@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Friendly reminder that Europe is not a continent.

[–] lugal@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 1 day ago (3 children)

If Europe isn't a continent then neither is India!

[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

If India is a continent then so is Somalia! And Arabia, but for some reason Arabia being it's own continent feels kinda right considering it really feels like neither Eurasia nor Africa, just a large mass between them

[–] deadbeef79000@lemmy.nz 5 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

It gets called The Indian subcontinent for ~~exactly that reason~~ but not Europe because of colonialism.

How dare you! Oh, wait, I agree!

[–] MufinMcFlufin@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Are we going with Eurasia or an Afro-Eurasia distinction? I feel like if someone were to insist on Afro-Eurasia then they also have to accept The Americas, or I guess it would just be a simple "America" which would get confusing since that's a pretty common verbal shorthand for USA. Under that sort of definition I think if you still insist on North and South America as regions then you'd have to also accept North and South Afro-Eurasia.

It'd also be pretty funny to try to argue that since North America was connected to Asia within the human timeline it should also be added. Imagine trying to refer to the continents: AfroAmeriEurasia, Australia, and Antarctic, with an optional Oceania thrown in the mix.

For clarity, I usually just go with North/South America, Australia, Antarctica, Africa, and Eurasia as the continental landmasses

[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

So long as we include Hokkaido in North America that's good by me

[–] NeatNit@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 1 day ago

Excellent Map Men video about this: https://youtu.be/hrsxRJdwfM0