Printable View
The original design featured a map with all the EU countries on it. The current design has a map with all of Europe on, including the non-EU members. Can anyone explain the reason for the change? Does it have anything to do with Sweden and Finland, and the unfortunate omission of Norway, especially when reduced to that scale? Would it look better if Sweden were turned upside down?
I guess it is because the Euro coins should include all the present and future members so putting the entire continent is reasonable - especially after 12 new members joined since 2004.
Asiatic Turkey is not on the coin because it is in... Asia, though there is no reason to expect the creators of the design have something against it too.
Anyway I think it is for strictly economical reasons - the design will last 'forever' however long that will be and whoever will join the EU and Eurozone.
Turkey would be located on the same continent as the rest of the countries in the EU, Eurasia.Quote:
Originally Posted by cegorach
http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2006-...97/eurasia.gif
And if you draw a line from southern Spain Eastwards, and from European Russia / Ukraine Southwards most of Turkey is in Europe (sort of).
~:smoking:
And what does it have to do with the coin's design ?
BigTex
Thanks for your lovely lecture, but you actually forgot about other interlinked landmasses - Africa-Eurasia or both Americas.
I doubt that relatively early geography has something to do with the way you present as the correct one.
Do you cuggest we should dig a channel through Ural mountains to call your continent continent at all.:juggle2:
This was just supposed to be a lighthearted jest at the unfortunate shape of Sweden and Finland combined, when Norway isn't there. I thought I gave a clue in pointing to the possibility of Sweden being shown pointing up rather than down, but I guess it was too subtle.
http://www.nikcain.net/weblog/eurocoin.jpg
Doctor's orders - Viagra. .:laugh4:
BTW - such pornographic images are not allowed in thiws forum :egypt:
P.S. I don't use Euro in general so wouldn't understand it for sure anyway.
Last time I checked Turkey was well east of the Ural Mountains.... Why draw the line at the northern shore of the mediteranean?:help:Quote:
Originally Posted by cegorach
Quite a bit of a difference between the America's, namely their on seperate plates. You will also note that California is west of North America's continental divide. Do you suggest we dig a tunnel through the rockies so we can continue to refer to California as being in North America?Quote:
Thanks for your lovely lecture, but you actually forgot about other interlinked landmasses - Africa-Eurasia or both Americas.
If it was relatively early geography, why did you fail to note it?Quote:
I doubt that relatively early geography has something to do with the way you present as the correct one.
Hopefully they'll come to their senses and put the full picture of Turkey on there.
Oh. Oh dear. That's, that's just....oh my. I'm not sure I'll ever be able to look at Scandanavia on a map the same way again. *snicker*Quote:
Originally Posted by Pannonian
Actually, Turkey is well west of the Urals -- draw a line straight north from the Caspian Sea, and that's (very) roughly where the Ural Mountains are located. :yes:Quote:
Originally Posted by BigTex
Because it is... obvious ? :inquisitive:Quote:
Originally Posted by BigTex
It is well known fact that Europe is a continent. You can cry it is unfair and everyone is wrong, but some things are so deeply rooted in history that it is totally useless to suddenly turn the order of things for no real reason.:smash:
Only a certain type of person would look at a 2 euro coin and see THAT.
This is the Backroom, where genital mutilation stories are all the rage, and where the most read thread on the front page is a discussion on whether or not one should disrobe hoodies. What kind of poster were you expecting to encounter here?Quote:
Originally Posted by Lorenzo_H