3 ms·

You probably see more interesting and diverse landscapes in 3000 km of France vs 24000 km of Canada.

• newsclues 4y ago
  Canada isn’t all frozen tundra. There is forest, mountains, plains, lakes, deserts, jungles, etc.
  • dudul 4y ago
    Nice strawman. I never said otherwise, but it's a fact that very few (if any?) countries pack so many diverse landscapes in an area as small as France.
    • newsclues 4y ago
      "You probably see more interesting and diverse landscapes in 3000 km of France vs 24000 km of Canada." Nothing in your comment had any mention of the density of diversity. The idea a vastly smaller area would be more diverse is also silly. You made a foolish, and unsubstantiated claim and are trying to say I am presenting straw man arguments, hahaha.
      • dudul 4y ago
        I am legit at a loss of words. The part you quoted literally state that in a much shorter distance you can see more diverse landscapes. This is literally what these numbers and words mean. As for "The idea a vastly smaller area would be more diverse is also silly." I have rarely read something so silly. France covers 213k square-miles are you saying that it cannot be more diverse than the Sahara that covers 3.5M ? I don't see this conversation leading to anything remotely interesting. It is clear that you don't have the most elementary knowledge of geography.
        • newsclues 4y ago
          Canada isn't the Sahara, it is a big diverse area. It's spans a big continent. (Is that a straw man argument I detect?) Nothing you've stated infers that France would naturally have more diverse landscapes compared to Canada. I don't know French Geography as much as I do Canadian, but I am not uneducated in the subject because we learn about it in school for history involving the wars. I've actually driven across most of Canada, and even I was surprised at the diversity. I didn't think I'd be driving through desert environments, or rainforests. Mountains, and endless farm and forest land was the stereotype. "The geography of France consists of a terrain that is mostly flat plains or gently rolling hills in the north and west and mountainous in the south (including the Massif Central and the Pyrenees) and the east (the highest points being in the Alps)." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geography_of_France https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geography_of_France "Canada can be divided into seven physiographic regions: the Canadian Shield, the interior plains, the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Lowlands, the Appalachian region, the Western Cordillera, Hudson Bay Lowlands and the Arctic Archipelago." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geography_of_Canada https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geography_of_Canada Much more geographically diverse. But please, if I am wrong, correct me. But I don't see this conversation leading to anything remotely interesting either, because you're trying to insult my intelligence and you are also incorrect about the facts. I've unfortunately never been to France, so I look forward to being corrected if I am mistaken.
• j7f3 4y ago
  Western Canada alone is absolutely stunning and wild af. You won't find a wilderness like that anywhere in Europe anymore. It's not for the faint of heart at all. While I am a pretty experienced backpacker I stayed away from most remote areas in western Canada. Even a day trip would take me on a peak that would be hiked just a few times per year. Zero cell service too.
  • dudul 4y ago
    What does extreme wilderness and no phone service have to do with diversity of landscapes?
    • j7f3 4y ago
      Should be obvious for an average person.