U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-16-2016, 06:59 PM
 
17 posts, read 10,443 times
Reputation: 36

Advertisements

http://cdn.theatlantic.com/assets/me...M/original.png

Generally speaking, the Broncos-rooting counties on this map are Western and ranch-oriented, while the counties that root for the Vikings and Packers are farm-oriented Midwestern.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-17-2016, 12:27 AM
 
Location: Bellingham, WA
1,085 posts, read 1,068,230 times
Reputation: 1933
Quote:
Originally Posted by NowInWI View Post
Fifty Highest CoHPs in Lower 48 - Peakbagger.com

What are some of you posters talking about, when you say that some east coast peaks are more prominent? Please see the link, and show me where I can find what you purport. (Don't ya think we have Google?)
To be fair, looking at county highpoints isn't an accurate way to find prominence, because many mountains rise above bases that are already at high elevations. In fact, even looking at a list of most prominent peaks isn't even a good way to determine the biggest base to summit height- the calculation generally used doesn't tell the whole story.

I'm not trying to make the case that most eastern mountains are bigger. But.... there are some mountains that would surprise a lot of people. For example, Mt. LeConte in TN rises 5,300' above Gatlinburg, and people in Marion, NC (~1,400') are in the shadows of Mt. Mitchell and the Black Mountains- over 5,000' above them. There are a number of subranges in the Southern Appalachians that tower 3,000'+ above the valley floors or surrounding land- Great Balsams, Great Smokies, Great Craggies, Roan Massif, Grandfather Mountain, etc. Much further north, Mt. Washington and Mt. Adams in the White Mountains of NH and Mt. Katahdin in Maine all rise more than 4,000' above the area around them.

Last edited by bartonizer; 04-17-2016 at 12:47 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-17-2016, 01:11 AM
 
Location: Bellingham, WA
1,085 posts, read 1,068,230 times
Reputation: 1933
Quote:
Originally Posted by SunGrins View Post
I think this is about right. There is a transition zone that takes up most of Oklahoma west of I-35 and goes into the Texas panhandle to about Amarillo. The mighty Arbuckles and the Flint Hills are on the eastern edge. Maybe draw a line from Palo Duro Canyon in TX to the Badlands in So. Dakota for the "west". And the Rockies are "big mountains" btw.
That's funny, I was going to specifically mention a line from Palo Duro to Badlands. That line's not too far off from the 100th, which is a pretty good dividing line, with most everything west over 2,000' and less than 20 inches of annual precipitation. There are few very "western-looking" exceptions- like the Wichita Mountains in OK, but in general I think the TX panhandle up through the middle of SD is where the west begins, at least to me.

And I agree about the Rockies being big mountains, in fact I'm surprised at the comments by other posters on this thread. Sure, Elbert itself is only about 4,000' above the Leadville area. But there are a ton of subranges within the Rocky Mountains that are 6,000' or more of vertical relief above their bases. Dude1984 mentioned the Sangres and San Juans, but there are many more out there, even within CO- heck even within the same vicinity as Mt. Elbert- the Collegiate Peaks all rise more than 7,000' above the Upper Arkansas Valley. Pike's Peak, Long's Peak and Mt. Evans are all within view of Front Range and are 8-9,000' higher. My favorite mountain in the state, Mt. Sopris in the Elk Range- rises nearly 7,000' above Carbondale in a very short distance.

Outside CO, the Tetons, Wind Rivers, Uintas, Absarokas, Sawtooths, Missions, Crazies, Beartoots, Bitteroots, to name a few- all have impressive vertical relief. And the people in Salt Lake City would probably argue that the Wasatch Front sure look like mountains, as opposed to very large hills.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-17-2016, 06:21 PM
 
Location: East of the Sun, West of the Moon
15,504 posts, read 17,716,813 times
Reputation: 30796
Quote:
Originally Posted by NowInWI View Post
Fifty Highest CoHPs in Lower 48 - Peakbagger.com

What are some of you posters talking about, when you say that some east coast peaks are more prominent? Please see the link, and show me where I can find what you purport. (Don't ya think we have Google?)
That link shows the elevation, not the prominence.

To put it another way, If you are at an elevation of 5,200 ft. in North Carolina, you are on top of a very high mountain. If you are at an elevation of 5,200 ft. in Albuquerque, New Mexico, you are in the (very flat) Sears parking lot.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-19-2016, 06:23 AM
 
2,601 posts, read 4,068,969 times
Reputation: 2275
Quote:
Originally Posted by ABQConvict View Post
That link shows the elevation, not the prominence.

To put it another way, If you are at an elevation of 5,200 ft. in North Carolina, you are on top of a very high mountain. If you are at an elevation of 5,200 ft. in Albuquerque, New Mexico, you are in the (very flat) Sears parking lot.
I understand this, even before it was pointed out to me. Here's something, the elevation in Colorado Springs is 6,035. Pikes Peak rises to an elevation of over 14,000 feet. That makes a difference of over 8,000 feet.

Elevation in ASheville NC is 2,133. Mount Mitchell, the highest peak in the East, rises to 6,684. That difference is 4,551. Now look at the numbers. Pikes Peak still rises another 1,500 feet above Mt. Mitchell, with the elevation differences taken into account. You aren't going to convince me that a peak 1,500 feet below that, looks more prominent.

If 1,500 feet doesn't make a mountain more prominent (from ground level), please explain why it doesn't.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-19-2016, 12:53 PM
 
Location: Bellingham, WA
1,085 posts, read 1,068,230 times
Reputation: 1933
Quote:
Originally Posted by NowInWI View Post
I understand this, even before it was pointed out to me. Here's something, the elevation in Colorado Springs is 6,035. Pikes Peak rises to an elevation of over 14,000 feet. That makes a difference of over 8,000 feet.

Elevation in ASheville NC is 2,133. Mount Mitchell, the highest peak in the East, rises to 6,684. That difference is 4,551. Now look at the numbers. Pikes Peak still rises another 1,500 feet above Mt. Mitchell, with the elevation differences taken into account. You aren't going to convince me that a peak 1,500 feet below that, looks more prominent.

If 1,500 feet doesn't make a mountain more prominent (from ground level), please explain why it doesn't.
I don't think ABQ was saying that Mt. Mitchell is more impressive than Pike's Peak- or more prominent (though the mention of Pike's Peak does run counter to his assertion that there are no "big" mountains in the Rockies). I think that the point is that using a county highpoints list a flawed method to judge the impressiveness of the mountains. Some of the most impressive mountains, like peaks in the North Cascades, get left completely off your list. But personally, I think using any one variable is probably insufficient- overall height leaves out vertical relief, prominence measure has a complicated calculation, spire measure rewards steep individual mountains but punishes ridges, etc.

The main point is that several eastern mountains have impressive vertical rises, comparable to some well-known western mountains. Of course, as I've mentioned earlier, there are many Rocky Mtn. peaks and ranges that dwarf anything back east. To your comment, a big difference in prominence usually means a more impressive mountain. But things like steepness and tree cover (or lack of) can make some peaks look much more spectacular than others, so it's not that easy....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-20-2017, 08:54 AM
 
182 posts, read 143,274 times
Reputation: 179
100th Meridian is where I'd say the west begins
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-20-2017, 09:14 AM
 
Location: Bel Air, California
21,318 posts, read 21,867,229 times
Reputation: 33476
here is a specific spot in Nebraska where the West begins right next to the dead western cottontail in the background


https://www.google.co.in/maps/place/...018131!6m1!1e1
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-20-2017, 09:20 AM
 
Location: Denver, CO
760 posts, read 588,107 times
Reputation: 1482
I have always used the Continental Divide as the gateway to the West.

Drive down I70 from Denver. Once you pass through the Eisenhower tunnel, and start to go through the resort towns, the vibe really changes to "the West".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-20-2017, 12:48 PM
 
Location: Houston, by way of New Orleans
7 posts, read 3,209 times
Reputation: 14
The west should be everything west of the Mississippi River.

But this is the Ideal names for the areas of the US.

1. The True South: Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, Florida
2. South Central US: Arkansas, Tennessee, Kentucky
3. The South East: South Carolina, North Carolina
4. The Mid-East: Virginia, West Virginia, Delaware, Maryland
5. The North East: New York, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Pennsylvania, New Hampshire, Maine
6. The Mid-West: Ohio, Indiana, Michigan, Illinois, Missouri, Minnesota, Wisconsin
7. Central US: Kansas, Nebraska, Iowa, Colorado
8. The South West: Texas, Oklahoma, New Mexico, Arizona, Utah
9. North Central US: North Dakota, South Dakota, Wyoming, Montana, Idaho
10. The West: California, Nevada
11. The Great North West: Washington, Oregon
12. The Other 2: Alaska & Hawaii
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top