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 06-23-2015, 08:49 PM
 
1,770 posts, read 1,205,666 times
Reputation: 1691

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by LINative View Post
Jump off any of those "flat" well rounded mountains and see what happens.
Jump off of a 20 foot rock and the results wouldn't be pretty either. I don't see what your point is.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-23-2015, 08:50 PM
 
1,770 posts, read 1,205,666 times
Reputation: 1691
Quote:
Originally Posted by joeyg2014 View Post
Yes, it would. Because it's not flat.

Credit: Appalachian Mountain Club
Appalachian Mountain Club - Your Connection to the Outdoors
Do you understand how a comparison works? 35 out of 58 counties in California have higher points than ANYTHING found in New England.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-23-2015, 08:54 PM
 
1,229 posts, read 973,401 times
Reputation: 929
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iaskwhy View Post
Do you understand how a comparison works?
Anybody who thinks the picture I just showed you is flat, no matter what they're comparing it to, is an idiot.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-23-2015, 09:00 PM
 
1,770 posts, read 1,205,666 times
Reputation: 1691
Quote:
Originally Posted by joeyg2014 View Post
Anybody who thinks the picture I just showed you is flat, no matter what they're comparing it to, is an idiot.
Yes, because a single picture is representative of all of New England. That is really logical. Anyway yes, that is flat COMPARED to this:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...,_Yosemite.jpg

Or countless other geographic features in the West.

Last edited by JMT; 06-26-2015 at 07:04 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-23-2015, 09:01 PM
 
Location: Howard County, Maryland
5,654 posts, read 3,640,251 times
Reputation: 16563
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iaskwhy View Post
Do you understand how a comparison works? 35 out of 58 counties in California have higher points than ANYTHING found in New England.
Maybe so, but that does not mean that New England is flat. It simply means that it is less mountainous than the West. It's also MORE mountainous than the South and the Midwest.

If you want to see what "flat" is, go to South Florida. Then try telling me that New England is flat, so I can get a good laugh.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-23-2015, 09:03 PM
 
1,770 posts, read 1,205,666 times
Reputation: 1691
Quote:
Originally Posted by bus man View Post
Maybe so, but that does not mean that New England is flat. It simply means that it is less mountainous than the West. It's also MORE mountainous than the South and the Midwest.

If you want to see what "flat" is, go to South Florida. Then try telling me that New England is flat, so I can get a good laugh.
I have been to every state in New England and I have been to South Florida. This is exactly why I said what I did in my first post in this thread. It depends on what you are comparing it to.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-23-2015, 09:10 PM
 
1,229 posts, read 973,401 times
Reputation: 929
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iaskwhy View Post
Yes, because a single picture is representative of all of New England. That is really logical. Anyway yes, that is flat COMPARED to this:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...,_Yosemite.jpg


Or countless other geographic features in the West.
No, it's not flat compared to anything because IT'S NOT FLAT.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-23-2015, 09:17 PM
 
Location: Appalachian New York, Formerly Louisiana
4,100 posts, read 4,730,726 times
Reputation: 5374
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iaskwhy View Post
I have been to every state in New England and I have been to South Florida. This is exactly why I said what I did in my first post in this thread. It depends on what you are comparing it to.
NO. It DOES NOT.

A piece of paper is STILL a piece of paper even if compared to a hunk of metal. Your logic makes no damned sense.

Kansas has higher elevation in general than Pennsylvania yet Kansas is mostly plains with a few areas of low rolls. Pennsylvania has deep valleys, sharp peaks and steep cliffs. By your logic that would make Kansas mountainous and Pennsylvania flat by comparing them to each-other. That is just ten-thousand leagues of dumb.

MEAN elevation in the west is higher than in the east, many of the "taller" mountains out there are of comparable rise from base to summit to any mountain in the east. Before you try to use it against me, no, I am not saying that that is true with every peak in the west.

Don't be a troll.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-23-2015, 09:24 PM
 
1,770 posts, read 1,205,666 times
Reputation: 1691
Quote:
Originally Posted by CookieSkoon View Post
NO. It DOES NOT.

A piece of paper is STILL a piece of paper even if compared to a hunk of metal. Your logic makes no damned sense.

Kansas has higher elevation in general than Pennsylvania yet Kansas is mostly plains with a few areas of low rolls. Pennsylvania has deep valleys, sharp peaks and steep cliffs. By your logic that would make Kansas mountainous and Pennsylvania flat by comparing them to each-other. That is just ten-thousand leagues of dumb.

MEAN elevation in the west is higher than in the east, many of the "taller" mountains out there are of comparable rise from base to summit to any mountain in the east. Before you try to use it against me, no, I am not saying that that is true with every peak in the west.

Don't be a troll.
That is why I was discussing elevation span and not elevation alone. Therefore, what you said doesn't hold. Flat is an adjective, not a noun so your piece of paper comparison is asinine.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-23-2015, 09:26 PM
 
1,770 posts, read 1,205,666 times
Reputation: 1691
Quote:
Originally Posted by joeyg2014 View Post
No, it's not flat compared to anything because IT'S NOT FLAT.
I really don't think you understand what an adjective is. 60 grit sand paper is rougher than 120 grit, it doesn't mean that 120 grit isn't rough, it means it is smoother than 60 grit though. You are being comically defensive over a trivial issue.
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