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.
Do you not see all the pictures of towns, buildings, farmland and non-native plants?
What do you want exactly ? Pictures with no people, no buildings, not even a small house, nothing in fact ? Just a mountain, or a lake, or a sea ? Huh...
We could talk about Italy and California for hours, no one will be right because the two are beautiful, it's not like one was beautiful and the other ugly as ****.
What do you want exactly ? Pictures with no people, no buildings, not even a small house, nothing in fact ? Just a mountain, or a lake, or a sea ? Huh...
Pretty much actually. Given the fact that is what is natural. I don't go to natural places to look at buildings and the less people, the better.
I think the (few) buildings in those shots complement the natural scenery perfectly. Even if they were not there they'd still beat California.
Then it seems like you don't value nature very much. Buildings and human inhabitation destroy nature. They are the opposite of nature and they detract from natural scenery. This is one of the main reasons Italy loses this competition. It would be much closer if Italy wasn't ruined by people for so long.
Pretty much actually. Given the fact that is what is natural. I don't go to natural places to look at buildings and the less people, the better.
You don't want natural scenery then, you want a desertic place in the middle of nowhere away from civilization.
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.