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.
The most beautiful nature is in Iceland. Talking about architecture I think France.
Monotous..check places like Chile...It has glaciers, volcanos, mountains, extreme temperatures...way more beautiful than anything Iceland has to offer.
Overall , taking into consideration cities and landscape it is hard to beat Italy
USA (Tons of different landscapes, though way too flat in the middle)
MExico (From deserts to the north, jungles to the south, beautiful beaches)
Colombia (the third most biodiverse nation on the planet according to biologists, from snow caped mountains, deserts, jungles, savannahs, there is even tundra in Colombia)
Russia (neverending deserts, taiga, tundra, lake regions, frozen arctic landscapes)
OVERRATED COUNTRIES THAT ARE NOT THE MOST BEAUTIFUL DESPITE BEING PUT HERE AS BREATHTAKING
France (France is flat like a pancake with the excepcion of the Alpine region, which is just the extreme south west of the country, the rest of the country is a predominantly pretty mundane looking flatland)
Italy (it's got picturesque things, but it's NOT geographically that impressive, yeah some rolling hills, beaches etc. but it's nothing to crap your pants about especially if you've seen the andes, or the namibian desert or the jungles of Asia)
Australia (it's huge, it's got weird animals, and the outback is remarkably dusty and red looking.... Despite its size however, Australia doesnt offer a wow factor, vastly semi-arid, with some green around Queensland, and some mediocre sized mountains around New South Wales. Australia is big and cool in the animal factor, but geographically is pretty meh)
Canada (nice impressive mountains you can find also in the US, and even much more impressive if you keep going south towards south america, the rest is flat like a pancake and then lakes and tundra)
Germany (flat, the south is alpine but once again dont except to be wowed)
Brazl (it might have the amazon jungle, "so do almost all of its neigbors and much well preserved than in Brazil", the rest of Brazil is massively mundane looking from a geographic point of view. Towards flat or hilly it's nothing to write home about)
USA (Tons of different landscapes, though way too flat in the middle)
MExico (From deserts to the north, jungles to the south, beautiful beaches)
Colombia (the third most biodiverse nation on the planet according to biologists, from snow caped mountains, deserts, jungles, savannahs, there is even tundra in Colombia)
Russia (neverending deserts, taiga, tundra, lake regions, frozen arctic landscapes)
OVERRATED COUNTRIES THAT ARE NOT THE MOST BEAUTIFUL DESPITE BEING PUT HERE AS BREATHTAKING
France (France is flat like a pancake with the excepcion of the Alpine region, which is just the extreme south west of the country, the rest of the country is a predominantly pretty mundane looking flatland)
Italy (it's got picturesque things, but it's NOT geographically that impressive, yeah some rolling hills, beaches etc. but it's nothing to crap your pants about especially if you've seen the andes, or the namibian desert or the jungles of Asia)
Australia (it's huge, it's got weird animals, and the outback is remarkably dusty and red looking.... Despite its size however, Australia doesnt offer a wow factor, vastly semi-arid, with some green around Queensland, and some mediocre sized mountains around New South Wales. Australia is big and cool in the animal factor, but geographically is pretty meh)
Canada (nice impressive mountains you can find also in the US, and even much more impressive if you keep going south towards south america, the rest is flat like a pancake and then lakes and tundra)
Germany (flat, the south is alpine but once again dont except to be wowed)
Brazl (it might have the amazon jungle, "so do almost all of its neigbors and much well preserved than in Brazil", the rest of Brazil is massively mundane looking from a geographic point of view. Towards flat or hilly it's nothing to write home about)
Suprised you don't quote Spain.
France and Italy are very compact and a good equilibrium of history, "beauty" (well, that's a personal POV) and easy access in Europe, with good food if you like it. That's the strength. And most tourists in Europe are...European, so wait 30 years and nature in Asia will be more invaded in number by asians than the trio of european tourist traps, because it's more impressive and asians will travel in Asia like Europeans in Europe.
Ofc a Nanga Parbat or K2 is worth the entire Alps moutain range, but the access is an adventure itself and in Pakistan so not very safe. While you take your jeep and mule for 1 week to see it from your eyes, I would do London, Paris, Chamonix, Roma at the same time.
I climbed the Kilimanjaro and its prettier by light years than the Barre des Ecrins I climbed too. But damn, you don't find Lyon, Geneva or whatever the place 4 hours away from Kili.
Here a picture of the killer mountain, the biggest amount of rocks that Earth has:
BTW, half of France is crossed by Pyrenees, Massif Central, Jura, Alps and there's also Corsica. Massif Central is modest, but with 1885m at the top, it's not pancake like.
Monotous..check places like Chile...It has glaciers, volcanos, mountains, extreme temperatures...way more beautiful than anything Iceland has to offer.
Overall , taking into consideration cities and landscape it is hard to beat Italy
I have never been in Chile, but I was in Iceland. I am convinced that breathtaking natural beauty and unique landscapes of Iceland and its citizens were my the most outstanding experience.
I agree with everything except Australia. For such a huge country it lacks in diversity when it comes to geography and biodiversity.
In terms of geography and climate, yea, but it is objectively biodiverse. Unless you're talking about the presence of species from a range of different ecologies...
13 different climates in a single country (according to Spanish official met agency). And that's just in mainland Spain.
That gives you the option to reach almost anything in less than 1 day in a driveable distance. The Canary Islands also have a near tropical forest (Laurisilva).
The only thing which you can't find in Spain is a tropical savannah or a jungle. But you can find tundra, continental, humid subtropical, mediterranean, oceanic landscapes; deserts, etc. Almost all!
Try 26 different climates in the contiguous USA alone
Spain doesn't have deserts, it has semi-arid regions though. It also hardly has any humid subtropical regimes, those are really mediterranean.
USA (Tons of different landscapes, though way too flat in the middle)
What constitutes "the middle"? The middle has everything from semi-arid steppe, to badlands, to low mountains and highlands, montane forest, to loess features and riverine landscapes, beautiful lakes, caves, mountains, cold deserts, mesas, and river canyons, and forests that range from hemiboreal in far northern Minnesota to subtropical moist in the southern regions of the Mississippi delta.
If you commented on America's flatness in it's center, you should've commented on how flat parts of central Argentina are, ditto northern China, Russia, South Africa.
You seem to have a rudimentary understanding of American geography.
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.
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.
