do you like a good sneaker how about a waterproof boot in the fall or winter well vessy is the best
of both worlds giving your feet unparalleled comfort and dryness regardless of the conditions
outside now here's something you say house to simon i've seen i've seen water resistant shoes
before but bessie and not water resistant they are legitimately waterproof tennis shoes i was in
the park the other day i've actually had this pair these are the new ones they sent me but i actually
want to talk about the old pair because i was in the park the other day and there's like a fountain
and it's got this little thing that goes off and i'm like i bet these are good 18 months you know
and normally like that waterproofing it's just not going to work after that long i put my feet
under the fountain and the water just pulls off it just like before i'll go back to the park and i'll
shoot some b-roll and it'll probably be showing here although maybe they closed the fountain for
winter look either way you'll see my old shoes bouncing off water the same happens for the new
shoes and these ones i haven't even worn these yet you can see they're fresh look i'll let them touch
my face it's also easy to clean sustainably made from something called dimetex which is
a very comfortable knit that help keeps you warm in the winter and cool in the summer i
again i'm just going to go off talking points like i got these vessies last year and i was
never a big sneaker guy i was kind of more boots and shoes i i just now just wear betty's 100 no
i've been joking wear them out in a downpour jump through puddles wear them to run errands
in town in the snow they're just reliable they look normal they look cool it's just uh it's
just a better way to go versus all my go-to shoes check them out through the link below
or just go to bessie.com for your pair of vessy shoes thank you vessie and now today's episode
ever wonder when a hill becomes a mountain well it turns out that language like the universe
likes to resist simplicity so the answer is it's complicated but that's not very interesting so
let's dive into it shall we to begin with turning to our trusty friend the miriam webster dictionary
we have the following definition of a mountain a landmass that projects conspicuously above
its surroundings and is higher than a hill helpful maybe the oxford english dictionary can do better
according to this bastion of english awesomeness mountains are a natural elevation of the earth's
surface rising more or less abruptly from the surrounding level and attaining an altitude which
relative to the adjacent elevation is impressive or notable as you can see the dictionaries of the
world are slightly less than helpful at nailing down precise specifications of what constitutes
a mountain versus a hill and it turns out science in various countries and institutions are equally
unhelpful coming up with a variety of ways to define this in a specific case though there are
some general things to consider when trying to classify a given bump in the ground now
as will come as a shock to absolutely no one in all such cases one of the main parameters for
distinguishing hills and mountains is size tall enough it's a mountain and falling short it's a
hill this would make the problem simple enough if that's really the only defining attribute
accounted for find a threshold above which you are atop a mountain and below which you are on a hill
this is exactly what many countries including mary old england used to do until the 1920s perhaps the
most well-known discourse about the subject is the 1990s movie the englishman who went up a hill but
came down a mountain where some welsh villagers are appalled with hugh grant's notion that their
village's mountain is in the eyes of the central english bureaucratic geographic association only a
hill but barely moving on from size another common idea is that a hill is a smooth rounded mound of
earth a bump in the natural landscapes often remaining unnamed a mountain on the other hand
must have a steep inclination it thus dominates the landscape messes with the path of clouds and
of course has a name but this description only pertains to the extreme examples of ragged and
spiky terrain these however are merely a characteristic of geographically younger
mountains such as the andes the alps or the rocky mountains geological grandad mountains can have a
more smooth surface such as the piccono mountains in pennsylvania thus clarify things a bit in 1936
roderick patty publisher of mountain geography gave mountains three defining characteristics
they should be impressive they should enter into the imagination of the people that live
in their shadows and they should have individual character and play a symbolic role in the local
area if that sounds vague to you well it is but surely there must be some harder rules and the
answer to that is well no not exactly as alluded to until the 1920s the british ordnance survey
defined a mountain as a geographic feature rising higher than a thousand feet that's 304 meters
from surrounding ground level this arbitrary line is behind the plot of the hugh grant movie as the
villagers had to build up the additional distance needed to reach the threshold america followed
the same trend until the 1970s nowadays however mr petty suggested local tradition plays a major role
generally a mountain should have a minimum height of 610 meters that's 2000 feet but if the locals
have always considered their hill a mountain well let's not anger them just for the sake of size
it is after all not always about size but presence and reputation this is particularly the case if
the subject observed is a single elevation in otherwise flat areas so relativity should also
be considered today the leaders in geography like the united states geological survey usgs
also do not have an exact definition of mountain and hill instead the organization's geographic
named information system gnis tries to follow some of the aforementioned few generally accepted
characteristics again things like climability it is a characteristic in the landscape what
do the locals consider it and so on and so forth moving on from hills and mountains perhaps we can
better have clarity with regards to seas and lakes to begin with simply put if it has a significant
amount of salt it is ac and if it is surrounded by land then it is a lake of course sometimes bodies
of water fit both bills such as the dead sea and the caspian sea in which case people just call it
as they see it although sometimes this can have major political ramifications for example with
the caspian sea its classification is in fact a very political issue as international waters have
different legislative statuses depending if it's a sea or a lake adding pressure to the situation
is the fact that the caspian sea is an area rich in oil and the country's sharing the borders among
others russia and iran are not exactly known as meek in their political stances so the status of
the caspian waters has been an ongoing issue for decades before the fall of the soviet union the
problems were solved with bilateral treaties as it boarded only the ussr and iran but after 1990
the caspian liquid mass was surrounded by five countries azerbaijan kazakhstan turkmenistan
russia and iran so the definition of a lake or sea made a big difference the lake would
be divided equally among the bordering countries therefore azerbaijan which does not have a very
long coastline would prefer this solution the seas on the other hand according to the un's
law of the sea the surface and bed are allotted nearer to shore according to the length of the
relevant coastline so kazakhstan which has a long front of the caspian waters preferred the solution
of calling it a c in 2018 a convention on the legal stages of the caspians he was held
each neighboring country was granted jurisdiction over 24 kilometers that's 15 miles of territorial
waters plus an additional 16 kilometers 10 miles of exclusive fishing rights on the surface this
doesn't necessarily add up to the full extent of the caspian sea so the rest is considered
international waters the seabed however was not defined within the convention and remains
subject to bilateral agreements between countries ultimately the caspian sea therefore still isn't a
sea or a lake completely but something in between and that's still not where the controversy ends
when does meandering water become a river versus a stream continents what's up with those guys either
five or the seven once more it depends on the definition and it isn't unilateral at all and
when deland masses stop being islands is australia and ireland one definition is that an island is
a landmass surrounded by water and smaller than a continent but for this we go back to
the disputed definition of a continent oceana for example is defined either by its tectonic plate
or by the land masses that reach out of the water and so it is that in our description of the
environment many of the words we use contain all these vague language notions that fail under the
scrutiny of precise definition feel free to use this information to spark up a heated debate over
whether the land mass you're currently gazing upon constitutes a humble hill
or a mighty mountain bonus fact the highest mountain of the dutch nation is a mere 322
metres and it's located at their southern border down at the ardennes there is a reason that we
call them the netherlands whenever you fear there is a proposal for a change a plan is in
the works that might elevate the netherlands in 2011 theazanoveld proposed the idea for
a mountain because well i guess why not to clarify this would not be like the dubai buildings which
are considered in essence tall sticks held up by clever static engineering the plan was to build
an actual mountain two kilometers tall and five kilometers wide to dominate the netherlands why
well for tourism unfortunately with an estimated cost of more than five trillion dollars it would
probably literally be cheaper to build moon colonies than this training facility for dutch
athletes but you know what they say national pride is beyond cost a counter proposal for the cost is
to fill the side of the mountains not needed for ski pistes with solar panels and wind turbines
etc so that you have a green mountain that also generates income or at least saves money through
generating electricity of course given the sky high costs let's just say that this probably
isn't going to happen at all so i really hope you found this video interesting if you did
please do hit that thumbs up button below don't forget to subscribe and thank you for watching