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.
So would you rather live in this fantasy California where the beach water turns warm year round? Or would you rather live in Florida with mountains, rocky coast line and mediterranean weather?
For me, Mediterranean climate is one of the most desirable, rare, and sought after climates where California losing I would be a deal breaker. Miami with a mountain backdrop would be one awesome sight. Florida with mountains is my dream fantasy merge of California and Florida.
Location: San Diego CA>Tijuana, BC>San Antonio, TX
6,507 posts, read 7,543,265 times
Reputation: 6878
Why would I want coastal California to be flat, hot and humid? If I wanted that in real life, I would move to real life Florida or even coast Texas.
Now, if the water were warm and somehow the weather would remain cool as is and the CA landscape remained the same, that would be nice a nice fantasy scenario.
Other than the side of the country and the name of the state, what exactly changes in this scenario?
Why would I want coastal California to be flat, hot and humid? If I wanted that in real life, I would move to real life Florida or even coast Texas.
Now, if the water were warm and somehow the weather would remain cool as is and the CA landscape remained the same, that would be nice a nice fantasy scenario.
Other than the side of the country and the name of the state, what exactly changes in this scenario?
My thoughts exactly. I prefer the real California, so I'd prefer the fictional Florida, since in this scenario they apparently just swap places.
I’m kinda confused if Florida got mountains and and other California stuff, it would be like California with warm clear water. Which is what you’re doing to California in this scenario. What’s the difference between the two fantasy states?
I’m kinda confused if Florida got mountains and and other California stuff, it would be like California with warm clear water. Which is what you’re doing to California in this scenario. What’s the difference between the two fantasy states?
If I'm understanding the OP correctly, California stays just as it is, except that the ocean water is swimmable year round. And Florida stays just as it is, except that it sprouts mountains.
In terms of natural scenery, I vastly prefer the current California to the current Florida. Thus, while adding mountains would add to Florida's appeal (in my eyes), it wouldn't be enough to overtake the sum total of California's natural beauty.
However, as a place to live, though I'm not fond of either of them, I prefer Florida. Adding mountains would be a nice addition, so it would simply help tilt the scales more towards Florida for me.
You asked two different questions - What if Florida had mountains, and what if Florida had a Mediterranean climate? If Florida had mountains, it would most likely look like the mountains in Puerto Rico and some other Caribbean islands. Likely covered with rainforests and feature a subtropical highland climate which IMO is even better than a Mediterranean climate. So I would go with Florida.
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.
