> aren't we all on islands? It depends, I suppose, on how you define an island. If you regard it as an area of land surrounded by water (as someone has already suggested) then Max's "island" stretching from Cape to Cape is a tenable view - although relying on a frozen Baring Strait could be a matter for contention. But few people would subscribe to such a definition, if only because it makes the term "island" more or less meaningless, from a practical point of view. So how can you define an island (apart from insisting the no man is --
) ?? Or how do you define a continent, for that matter?
Australia is generally considered to be a continent, but a glance at any atlas shows it quite clearly as an island, albeit a pretty huge one. If you regard that continent as being
Australasia, then you are presented with a series of islands.
Europe and Asia are considered to be separate continents yet are very clearly joined. You could, if you so wished, travel from one to the other without passing water, if I may put it that way. Trans-continent rather than incontinent, one might say.
This is a matter that has not previously given me any reason for reflection, but I own to being very confused, now
