Phantom (Apocryphal; Transient) Islands

[EnolaGaia]

Thanks for the response ...

I didn't suspect the story was a total fabrication. Sorry if I gave that impression ...

That timeframe would coincide with the end of the Vietnam War and the years immediately following. This would suggest Vietnamese, as well as Chinese, airspace boundaries might have constrained their flight path options.

The timeframe also coincides with pre-revolutionary Iran and a period of both close partnerships with Pakistan and active presence at east African sites, so it's conceivable both military and airlift (e.g, resupply) missions out of Diego could have been directed due north or even westward.

This remains relevant owing to your friend's allusion to islands named for Da Gama. The only islands named for Da Gama are to the west of Diego.

This is why I'm interested in determining whether your friend's cited specifics were the result of instrument data (e.g., directly observed as a pilot) or personal estimation / impression (e.g., as a passenger).

The reason I brought up statute versus nautical miles was because 250 nautical miles would be on the order of 288 statute miles - i.e., the stated figure might be closer to the distance (from Diego) at which 'known' islands could be in play as possible candidates.

 

[gerhard1]

Thanks for the response ...

I didn't suspect the story was a total fabrication. Sorry if I gave that impression ...

That timeframe would coincide with the end of the Vietnam War and the years immediately following. This would suggest Vietnamese, as well as Chinese, airspace boundaries might have constrained their flight path options.

The timeframe also coincides with pre-revolutionary Iran and a period of both close partnerships with Pakistan and active presence at east African sites, so it's conceivable both military and airlift (e.g, resupply) missions out of Diego could have been directed due north or even westward.

This remains relevant owing to your friend's allusion to islands named for Da Gama. The only islands named for Da Gama are to the west of Diego.

This is why I'm interested in determining whether your friend's cited specifics were the result of instrument data (e.g., directly observed as a pilot) or personal estimation / impression (e.g., as a passenger).

The reason I brought up statute versus nautical miles was because 250 nautical miles would be on the order of 288 statute miles - i.e., the stated figure might be closer to the distance (from Diego) at which 'known' islands could be in play as possible candidates.

You're fine; I didn't take it that way.

Diego Garcia is about 7 S, 72 E, and the only islands on the chart I have that are named (presumably) after da Gama are about 2 S 78 E. This is NE of Diego. Admittedly, this location is a rough estimate, but it does coincides with the location my friend gave for the island that he saw.

But the problem, like I said before, is that the water in that area where the 'da Gama islands' are located, is too deep. This is one reason that I think his location could be off.

To answer another question that you brought up: he was a passenger but I don't know if the pilot told him or he deduced the location. That is a fair point.

The fact that my friend located 'his' islands at where my 1817 chart has the 'da Gama islands' is quite a coincidence.

 

[EnolaGaia]

Stommel notes a 'Gama' island purportedly located between the Chagos archipelago (which includes Diego Garcia) and the apocryphal(?) Ouro island.

However, he states, "The island Gama, between Ouro and the Chagos Archipelago was already regarded as illusory in 1787, yet it persists on the 1817 chart." (p. 125; see also map illustration on p. 127)

SOURCE: http://books.google.com/books?id=-V...wj4KHUcdCXYQ6AEIQjAJ#v=onepage&q=gama&f=false

 

[gerhard1]

Stommel notes a 'Gama' island purportedly located between the Chagos archipelago (which includes Diego Garcia) and the apocryphal(?) Ouro island.

However, he states, "The island Gama, between Ouro and the Chagos Archipelago was already regarded as illusory in 1787, yet it persists on the 1817 chart." (p. 125; see also map illustration on p. 127)

SOURCE: http://books.google.com/books?id=-VjIDgAAQBAJ&pg=PA143&lpg=PA143&dq=gama stommel&source=bl&ots=F-hW6E8IRd&sig=fR7IAaFFS8h8q_ruHuNWcvMqqPo&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwinmbbe8sLUAhUGwj4KHUcdCXYQ6AEIQjAJ#v=onepage&q=gama&f=false

Sometimes there are no easy answers and this is one of those times. Personally, I am of the view that there are no more islands left to discover, but this view is not graven in stone. If someone were present solid evidence that they had found an uncharted island, I'd take a look at it and judging from your responses here in this thread, I'd wager that you would too.

Despite the coincidence of his locating an unknown island in about the same location as the 'da Gama' island shown on the 1817 Admiralty chart, my money, if I was a betting man, would be on his seeing one of the southern Maldives.

 

[EnolaGaia]

... If someone were present solid evidence that they had found an uncharted island, I'd take a look at it and judging from your responses here in this thread, I'd wager that you would too.

Indeed! That was why I was seeking more specifics about your friend's story.

Despite the coincidence of his locating an unknown island in about the same location as the 'da Gama' island shown on the 1817 Admiralty chart, my money, if I was a betting man, would be on his seeing one of the southern Maldives.

Agreed ... The allusion to an island or group of islands named for Vasco da Gama was the bit that seemed to stand out to me as a key clue. I'm still curious as to where and how he obtained (and / or mentally developed ... ) the connection between his sighting and something so named.

There is a documented and long-sought phantom island / archipelago named for da Gama (Gama Land; Gamaland), but it was reported from the northern Pacific by, and named for, Vasco's grandson João da Gama. The Wikipedia article on this grandson:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/João_da_Gama

... includes an image from a 1643 atlas citing "islands João da Gama found". This attribution is the closest analogue to any historical 'Islas da Gama' (whatever ... ) I could locate.

 

[gerhard1]

Indeed! That was why I was seeking more specifics about your friend's story.




Agreed ... The allusion to an island or group of islands named for Vasco da Gama was the bit that seemed to stand out to me as a key clue. I'm still curious as to where and how he obtained (and / or mentally developed ... ) the connection between his sighting and something so named.

There is a documented and long-sought phantom island / archipelago named for da Gama (Gama Land; Gamaland), but it was reported from the northern Pacific by, and named for, Vasco's grandson João da Gama. The Wikipedia article on this grandson:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/João_da_Gama

... includes an image from a 1643 atlas citing "islands João da Gama found". This attribution is the closest analogue to any historical 'Islas da Gama' (whatever ... ) I could locate.

He actually didn't. All he said to me was that he saw what he believed to an island or group of islands about 250 miles NE of Diego Garcia. When I got home, the first place I looked for them was on google earth and I saw nothing even close to the location that he gave. I then remembered the Admiralty chart from Stommel's book and it was when I looked on it and saw some islands in about the same location, that I made the association. He did not name the islands; he did not know what they were; the only thing he knew was their approximate location.

I should have been more clear; sorry about the misunderstanding.

 

[EnolaGaia]

No harm, no foul, no problem ... Thanks for the clarification.

 

[gerhard1]

Indeed! That was why I was seeking more specifics about your friend's story.




Agreed ... The allusion to an island or group of islands named for Vasco da Gama was the bit that seemed to stand out to me as a key clue. I'm still curious as to where and how he obtained (and / or mentally developed ... ) the connection between his sighting and something so named.

There is a documented and long-sought phantom island / archipelago named for da Gama (Gama Land; Gamaland), but it was reported from the northern Pacific by, and named for, Vasco's grandson João da Gama. The Wikipedia article on this grandson:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/João_da_Gama

... includes an image from a 1643 atlas citing "islands João da Gama found". This attribution is the closest analogue to any historical 'Islas da Gama' (whatever ... ) I could locate.

The Pacific islands named after the grandson could very well be the Kuril's.

 

[gerhard1]

If the islands were named after Vasco da Gama, they are known for a long time and should be mentioned in other books or manuscripts, particularly in ones of Iberian origin. Try the Islario General, for instance:

https://dl.wdl.org/10090/service/10090.pdf

In going through this linked document, I found something interesting.

If anyone cares to go to the upper right corner of the map on page 58 of the pdf document, you willsee a small group of islands just to the left of what appears to be a stamp. I believe that these are the phantom 'da Gama' group.

 

[EnolaGaia]

I'm not seeing anything labeled 'da Gama' ...

I've gone to page 58 of the PDF document (as opposed to the numbered page 58 of the document itself). I see the oval stamp.

Off to the northwest (actual direction per map) of the stamp I see an island or archipelago with a caption whose final part starts with a 'g'.

It appears to me that this 'g' components has 5 letters in it, not four, and the second letter appears to be a 'u' rather than an 'a'.

I can't tell much about it at all, given the blurriness of the image.

 

[gerhard1]

I'm not seeing anything labeled 'da Gama' ...

I've gone to page 58 of the PDF document (as opposed to the numbered page 58 of the document itself). I see the oval stamp.

Off to the northwest (actual direction per map) of the stamp I see an island or archipelago with a caption whose final part starts with a 'g'.

It appears to me that this 'g' components has 5 letters in it, not four, and the second letter appears to be a 'u' rather than an 'a'.

I can't tell much about it at all, given the blurriness of the image.

In the SE corner of the map there is the blue oval that you mentioned. To the west of the oval, there is a legend or something that reminds me of a pencil. Immediately east of the 'pencil' point there is a group of small islands. They are between the oval and Ceylon. I agree that they are not labelled as 'da Gama'; in fact, I don't think they are labelled as anything else, at least as far as I can tell.

From what I surmise, these islands between the oval and Ceylon, were not what you were referring to in the quoted post.

Is the island that you mean almost due west of the southern-most point of India?

 

[EnolaGaia]

I'm even more confused now ...

Ceylon is not depicted on this map. The 58th page map illustrates the region of the Bay of Bengal eastward. It shows the mouth(s) of the Ganges, the Malay Peninsula, Sumatra, and Java (and various fragmentary bits scattered off toward the east).

If you're referring to the island labeled 'Cilolo', that's not Ceylon. Cilolo (at least today ... ) is a district or region on the island of Java. I can't locate any reference to 'Cilolo' being applied as the name of a separate island.

Portuguese for 'Ceylon' is 'Ceilão'.

 

[gerhard1]

I'm even more confused now ...

Ceylon is not depicted on this map. The 58th page map illustrates the region of the Bay of Bengal eastward. It shows the mouth(s) of the Ganges, the Malay Peninsula, Sumatra, and Java (and various fragmentary bits scattered off toward the east).

If you're referring to the island labeled 'Cilolo', that's not Ceylon. Cilolo (at least today ... ) is a district or region on the island of Java. I can't locate any reference to 'Cilolo' being applied as the name of a separate island.

Portuguese for 'Ceylon' is 'Ceilão'.

The map I am referring to is the next page after TABLA SESTA. It very clearly shows the island of Ceylon (present-day Sri Lanka) and the Indian subcontinent. On this map, the islands of which I speak are between the blue oval in the upper RH corner and Ceylon (Sri Lanka). Now the pdf has it on page 55 (pdf, not the manuscript) and it was on p. 58 before. Odd.

Hopefully we're on the same page now*. Sorry about the confusion. Damn computers.

*No pun intended.

 

[EnolaGaia]

OK - thanks for the update / clarification. I see the map on PDF page 55 and the island group you cited (near the 'pencil point').

I have no idea what islands are being represented there, nor whose report(s) may have supported their placement there.

The closest (but still very approximate ... ) known feature would be the Nikitin (aka Afanasy Nikitin) seamount, which by definition shouldn't have been visible above the surface.

 

[gerhard1]

OK - thanks for the update / clarification. I see the map on PDF page 55 and the island group you cited (near the 'pencil point').

I have no idea what islands are being represented there, nor whose report(s) may have supported their placement there.

The closest (but still very approximate ... ) known feature would be the Nikitin (aka Afanasy Nikitin) seamount, which by definition shouldn't have been visible above the surface.

Quite so, good and noble sir. That seamount, at 3 S, 83 E, is the closest feature in the area that is anywhere near possible, but it is still 11,000 ft below the surface. It couldn't be the islands in question.

Weird.

 

[EnolaGaia]

A side note ... I feel condolences are due those involved with cartography during the (Euro) age of exploration.

The seafarers reporting new geographical items were blundering about without accurate means for even estimating a day's progress, generally sticking close by shorelines they could only sketchily describe. They had no more than a shaky grip on latitude, and longitude was still largely guesswork. Out on the open sea they reported and observed what they happened to encounter, but they frankly didn't (and couldn't ... ) know for certain where they were when they encountered it.

This seemingly chaotic and futile context for the seafarers' reporting was still arguably better than the cartographers' lot. They had to make sense of all the isolated (and sometimes mutually contradictory) tidbits arriving weeks, months, and / or years after the actual sightings and then assemble a coherent visual representation of the mess.

 

[gerhard1]

A side note ... I feel condolences are due those involved with cartography during the (Euro) age of exploration.

The seafarers reporting new geographical items were blundering about without accurate means for even estimating a day's progress, generally sticking close by shorelines they could only sketchily describe. They had no more than a shaky grip on latitude, and longitude was still largely guesswork. Out on the open sea they reported and observed what they happened to encounter, but they frankly didn't (and couldn't ... ) know for certain where they were when they encountered it.

This seemingly chaotic and futile context for the seafarers' reporting was still arguably better than the cartographers' lot. They had to make sense of all the isolated (and sometimes mutually contradictory) tidbits arriving weeks, months, and / or years after the actual sightings and then assemble a coherent visual representation of the mess.

Quite so. Until the invention of the marine chronometer by Scottish carpenter John Harrison in the mid 18th century that longitude could not be determined with any degree of accuracy. Latitude was much easier to determine.

Bouvet Island, for example, was removed from navigational charts because longitude could not be fixed with any degree of accuracy and several of the islands mentioned in this thread were incorrectly charted due to errors in calculating longitude. In fact, Captain James Cook when he first sought Bouvet, started about three degrees to the east of Bouvet's position and continued in that direction until he gave up, concluding if memory serves, that Bouvet did not exist. Soon after and due to Cook's and others not finding the island, the Admiralty removed it from the charts. In the 1890's and once more in the 1920's, German survey ships located and correctly charted Bouvet, and it has remained on the charts ever since.

A related item concerns Thompson Island.

Here is the wiki article on Thompson.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thompson_Island_(South_Atlantic)

 

[gerhard1]

Island forming off North Carolina coast.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/mystery-bermuda-triangle-deepens-dangerous-10714990

Interesting article but according to the map they used, the island is actually pretty far removed from the Triangle.

 

[rynner2]

Island forming off North Carolina coast.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/mystery-bermuda-triangle-deepens-dangerous-10714990

Interesting article but according to the map they used, the island is actually pretty far removed from the Triangle.

Yep. The BBC covers this with no mention of The Bermuda Triangle:
New island forms on North Carolina's Atlantic coast
29 June 2017

A new island has formed off the coast of North Carolina's Cape Hatteras National Seashore.
The isle is a mile long (1.6km), depending on tides and weather, and separated from the mainland by a (330ft) 100 metre wide channel.

It was first spotted by locals as a "bump" above the water in April, according to the Island Free Press.
Photos taken by a Connecticut tourist have gone viral on Instagram, leading to a boost in curious visitors.
Photographer Chad Koczera described encountering the island during his visit to Cape Point.

"My fiancee and I were driving to the point after a storm to collect shells when we spotted an area we couldn't get to by car," he said.

He described returning for his fifth time to the park, and to visit Cape Point where he had proposed marriage to his then-girlfriend.
"I sent the drone up to check it out and noticed this beautiful island. We didn't get a chance to make it on to the island because of the strong current."

The island is littered with old shipwrecks and whale bones that poke through its sands, says local historian Danny Couch.
Experts say the shores of the Outer Banks are constantly shifting, as sandbars rise above or sink back below the water.

Park superintendent Dave Hallac has cautioned visitors against trying to swim or walk across the channel to reach the island.
Currents can swiftly carry away a person, while sharks and sting rays have been spotted in the area.
Visitors are advised to use a kayak or paddleboard to reach Hatteras Island, as it's been dubbed.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-40438209

"when we spotted an area we couldn't get to by car" - the American nightmare!

 

[RaM]

The one off Fleetwood continues to grow, the engine block it shows from a Schooner that
went aground in WW11 that engine used to be visible from here about 3 miles away
it looked about as big as a long wheel base land rover but you can no longer see it due
to the island that is now visible at most states of tide.

 

[RaM]

Some years ago the EU decides from a certain date no further pipelines to dump sewage into the sea
would be allowed, this led to a spate of new pipelines to beat the ban, big business and governments are
dead keen on the environment as long as it's not them paying ence the fast action to beat the ban.
Now at the time we were told that the discharge would be a colorless odorless liquid, anyway it must have
been a rather thick liquid as the pipe blocked so some bright spark decided to pump compressed air into
the pipe to clear it only for the pipe to pop up from under the sand and float to the surface.
"These pipes are the same as the one on the beach in the news and the same thing happened here were
one pipe floated away and ended up on the beach but they could not refloat it and it had to be cut up".
Right back to the story, they re dug the trench and by allowing the pipe to fill with water and fitting
concrete weights managed to sink the pipe into it, they then brought in thousands of tones of stone
to bury it and hopefully keep it buried.
It is this stone that many of us suspect is now forming the island off Fleetwood, but now the plot thickens
as the pipe as now made another brake for freedom likely due to all the stone disappearing and forming the
island so if things run true to form they will do the same again and dump many more ship loads of stone
on the pipe that will then migrate to join it's mates now part of the island which will continue to grow.
It keeps us locals amused at any rate though I suspect the stone including the Island will eventually
end up in and filling the Fleetwood channel as it is slowly moving this way, then again they may get
clever and recycle the stone from the island which probably makes to much sense for them to try.

Above is the coffer dam they built to work from,
and below is the beast'y it's self it is much bigger in real life than it looks on here you can see some
of the concrete saddles that were supposed to keep it down.
For every action there is a opposite and often totally unexpected reaction, nature will alway win.

 

[Krepostnoi]

The fascinating tale of Ravenserodd: an island that emerged off Spurn Point in early medieval times, becoming amongst other things a hotbed of piracy preying on the delicate souls of Grimsby. This displeased the Almighty (according to contemporary chroniclers, at any rate) and so the island was doomed to return whence it had come. Article also contains implicit advice not to invest in coastal property along the southern Yorkshire riviera.

 

[Min Bannister]

The fascinating tale of Ravenserodd: an island that emerged off Spurn Point in early medieval times, becoming amongst other things a hotbed of piracy preying on the delicate souls of Grimsby. This displeased the Almighty (according to contemporary chroniclers, at any rate) and so the island was doomed to return whence it had come. Article also contains implicit advice not to invest in coastal property along the southern Yorkshire riviera.

A mere "like" doesn't cut it. That really was fascinating K, thank you.

 

[Krepostnoi]

A mere "like" doesn't cut it. That really was fascinating K, thank you.

 

[blessmycottonsocks]

Just ordered from Amazon. Looks like a fascinating read:

"Beyond the Map: Unruly enclaves, ghostly places, emerging lands and our search for new utopias"
By: Alastair Bonnett

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Beyond-Map...qid=1506067182&sr=1-1&keywords=beyond+the+map

 

[Coal]

The fascinating tale of Ravenserodd: an island that emerged off Spurn Point in early medieval times, becoming amongst other things a hotbed of piracy preying on the delicate souls of Grimsby. This displeased the Almighty (according to contemporary chroniclers, at any rate) and so the island was doomed to return whence it had come. Article also contains implicit advice not to invest in coastal property along the southern Yorkshire riviera.

Fascinating, thank you. I drove along that coast last year as it happens.

 

[gerhard1]

Looking up Thompson Island, supposedly near Bouvet, I happened across this German map from 1898.

 

[RaM]

I rather think the Island that has been growing off Fleetwood's days are numbered
a 30,000 tone ship the Rockpiper is hovering about the area and I suspect the stone
will be moved to cover a large outfall pipe that has a habit of floating to the surface,
but mother nature being what she is I am willing to bet that over time the island
will form again as the stone migrated back and the puny efforts of man to keep
the pipe below the sand will come to nought.

 

[EnolaGaia]

This may be an example of something that could easily have spawned phantom island sightings in past centuries.

A volcanic island in Tonga emerged 3 years ago, but wasn't expected to last very long. It's managed to persist beyond original expectations, and its probable lifespan is now estimated to be somewhere between 6 and 30 years.

In past centuries 6 to 30 years would have been a virtual eye-blink between explorer visits in the more remote parts of the oceans.

Pacific pop-up: island that rose from the ashes might last 30 years
A new Tongan island formed from the ash of a 2014 volcanic eruption in the South Pacific could exist for decades, according to a study released by Nasa.

The ash island, unofficially named Hunga Tonga-Hunga Ha’apai, formed during a submarine volcanic eruption that lasted from late December 2014 to early January 2015. The new land mass, which has a 120m summit, was originally only predicted to last months.

Instead, Nasa now believes Hunga Tonga-Hunga Ha’apai will remain for between six and 30 years, making it the first island of this type to persist in the modern satellite era. ...

FULL STORY: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...-that-rose-from-the-ashes-might-last-30-years

NASA REPORT (cited herein): https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddar...nd-made-of-tuff-stuff-likely-to-persist-years

 

[gerhard1]

Something--I don't have the foggiest idea what--got me thinking of Pagoda Rock in the South Atlantic. Information concerning Pagoda Rock is hard to find, even using Al Gore's wondrous invention. The first I had heard of it was in Gould's book Oddities. All I knew of it was that it was vaguely associated with Bouvet as Gould had suggested a search for it as a hazard to navigation.

I looked for a while but no joy, so I threw in the towel. That was some time back, possibly around the time I started this thread.

A few days ago, I got bit and got thinking about it once more. This time, I included South Atlantic in my search terms and there she was. From the book, published in the UK,

Chronological List of Antarctic Expeditions and Related Historical Events
By R. K. Headland

Cambridge University Press

I couldn't do a C&P, but according to this source, a British naval vessel, HMS Pagoda, was doing a magnetic survey of the South Atlantic and the southern Indian Ocean in 1845 (also searching unsuccessfully for Bouvet) and spotted a rock at 60' 11" South and 4' 43" East. They named it Pagoda Rock, presumably after their vessel. Later searches revealed nothing at this location.

I checked Google Earth at the coordinates listed, and there is nothing there, and the depth is 17,593 feet, around 5000 meters. What they saw, if anything, was possibly a piece of ice.