Very cool.

And something appears to be sucking just north of the US border.

This is why storms are so bad in TX/OK. Fronts from the NW meet the humidity from the gulf, and hell breaks loose.

That is pretty damn cool. I just hope that it keeps the storms here, we need the precipitation.

I already had all the visual proof I needed that Oklahoma sucks years ago. Just look at it.

RolandDeschain wrote:I already had all the visual proof I needed that Oklahoma sucks years ago. Just look at it.

Where was that taken?

No clue, it just came up on a Google Image search for Oklahoma.

I like this one better Roland

naw, Oklahoma does suck. Cost of living's low though, so it's aiight.

peachesenregalia wrote:naw, Oklahoma does suck. Cost of living's low though, so it's aiight.

Come on Peaches, you don't like Thundersleet or Quakeanadoes? I love the new names for the weather here

That's definitely better, Okie; but frankly, any competition against Washington state within the continental United States as far as scenic photos goes is going to lose. Handily.

RolandDeschain wrote:That's definitely better, Okie; but frankly, any competition against Washington state within the continental United States as far as scenic photos goes is going to lose. Handily.

I know man, I'm originally from Oregon, just had to show that there are some "scenic" areas here

So visually looking at that map...if Oklahoma is the butthole, does that make Dallas a hemorrhoid?

Just in case anybody wants to try, I'll throw a few WA-state pics up on here.

JesterHawk wrote:So visually looking at that map...if Oklahoma is the butthole, does that make Dallas a hemorrhoid?

I know many things confuse you, but with the thread title "....Oklahoma sucks..", Dallas would likely be a mole, as suck usually applies to the function of the mouth.

Now, if you suck with your butthole, then continue on your way.

DTexHawk wrote:

JesterHawk wrote:So visually looking at that map...if Oklahoma is the butthole, does that make Dallas a hemorrhoid?

I know many things confuse you, but with the thread title "....Oklahoma sucks..", Dallas would likely be a mole, as suck usually applies to the function of the mouth.

Now, if you suck with your butthole, then continue on your way.

I know you may confuse "visually" with "literally" but I was in no way referencing the wind flows other than how they look to be swirling towards a central location, which I dubbed "the butthole" of the image, simply as a way to call Dallas a hemorrhoid.

Just to avoid further confusion, and to make my point inexplicably clear, I am saying that Dallas is a shithole. As evidence, I submit Jerry Jones and the Cowboys. Now, if you prefer to go with the sucking imagery, maybe the epicenter should lie in Dallas, unless Jerry's glory holing days took place in Oklahoma (which is entirely possible).

RolandDeschain wrote:Just in case anybody wants to try, I'll throw a few WA-state pics up on here.

I'll get back to you with some Colorado stuff... currently bogged down in work.

JesterHawk wrote:

DTexHawk wrote:

JesterHawk wrote:So visually looking at that map...if Oklahoma is the butthole, does that make Dallas a hemorrhoid?

I know many things confuse you, but with the thread title "....Oklahoma sucks..", Dallas would likely be a mole, as suck usually applies to the function of the mouth.

Now, if you suck with your butthole, then continue on your way.

I know you may confuse "visually" with "literally" but I was in no way referencing the wind flows other than how they look to be swirling towards a central location, which I dubbed "the butthole" of the image, simply as a way to call Dallas a hemorrhoid.

Just to avoid further confusion, and to make my point inexplicably clear, I am saying that Dallas is a shithole. As evidence, I submit Jerry Jones and the Cowboys. Now, if you prefer to go with the sucking imagery, maybe the epicenter should lie in Dallas, unless Jerry's glory holing days took place in Oklahoma (which is entirely possible).

I can't help you if you are constantly on the lookout for things that look like buttholes.

DTexHawk wrote:

JesterHawk wrote:

DTexHawk wrote:I know many things confuse you, but with the thread title "....Oklahoma sucks..", Dallas would likely be a mole, as suck usually applies to the function of the mouth.

Now, if you suck with your butthole, then continue on your way.

I know you may confuse "visually" with "literally" but I was in no way referencing the wind flows other than how they look to be swirling towards a central location, which I dubbed "the butthole" of the image, simply as a way to call Dallas a hemorrhoid.

Just to avoid further confusion, and to make my point inexplicably clear, I am saying that Dallas is a shithole. As evidence, I submit Jerry Jones and the Cowboys. Now, if you prefer to go with the sucking imagery, maybe the epicenter should lie in Dallas, unless Jerry's glory holing days took place in Oklahoma (which is entirely possible).

I can't help you if you are constantly on the lookout for things that look like buttholes.

Happens everytime I see "Dallas" or a thread that Huggy has participated in. Both of which happened in quick succession before I posted this. My deepest apologies if you live in or near a butthole city.

volsunghawk wrote:

RolandDeschain wrote:Just in case anybody wants to try, I'll throw a few WA-state pics up on here.

I'll get back to you with some Colorado stuff... currently bogged down in work.

Pffft, Colorado's got nothing on WA state. The view of the mountains from Seattle is way more magnificent because of a) ocean, b) green plant life abound, and c) it's viewed from sea level. If you're in Denver, sure, the technical height of the nearby mountain ranges is taller than the Cascades for example, but a lot of the nearby stuff is only a few thousand feet above Denver. Even one of the highest points, Longs Peak, is an hour-and-a-half away from Denver at 14,000 feet. Same approximate height and a slightly longer drive to Mount Rainier from Seattle. Washington also has the only rain forest in North America.

I'm not bashing Colorado, I'm just saying Washington's the easy winner, here. How in the world are you going to compare against the additional things WA has over CO? I mean, Colorado has more of the winter trails, ski resorts, etc. obviously; but it's mostly more of the same, know what I mean?

RolandDeschain wrote:That's definitely better, Okie; but frankly, any competition against Washington state within the continental United States as far as scenic photos goes is going to lose. Handily.

Washington would definatly be in my top group. Along with in no particular order Oregon, Montana, New Hampshire, Florida, Colorado and California.

But imo, without doubt the most beautiful state in the continental united states (not counting Alaska, which easily would win) is Utah. And its not close in my opinion. Washington doesnt have anything that can compare to the Canyonlands, desert area's of Utah. Nor do any of Washington's mountain area's compare to the Provo or Salt Lake area's.

Utah:

J, Utah's definitely got a lot of beauty; but much of the southwest also has a fair bit of that, too. Rain forest, mountains, (including the spot that gets more annual snowfall than any other place on Earth; Mount Rainier) desert, ocean, hot springs, and a moderate climate in a major urban area; no other place in the country has all of these things.

I'm not saying Washington is the best state in the country. It's not. However, I am saying it's the most scenic. It's got the largest variety of scenery, and that part's not even debatable. Name another state with as many different major scenic areas.

California rivals Washington for scenic beauty for sure.

RolandDeschain wrote:I already had all the visual proof I needed that Oklahoma sucks years ago. Just look at it.

Looks like eastern washington without mountains in the distance

Largent80 wrote:California rivals Washington for scenic beauty for sure.

When the sun is out Seattle and western Wa. is by far the most scenic place in the U.S. Unfortunately that's only half the time. Smog excludes SoCal from the conversation.

RolandDeschain wrote: Rain forest, mountains, desert, ocean, hot springs, and a moderate climate in a major urban area; no other place in the country has all of these things.

Oregon's got all those things.

I wasnt certain about Rain Forest, because I have always heard that the Olympic Peninsula is the only rain forest in the U.S. but apparently thats just you Washingtonian's spreading misinformation. Internet research shows that Washington, Oregon, and Northern California all have Temperate rain forest.

Apparently there's also small area's of rain forest in the southern Appalachian mountains in North Carolina, Georgia and Tennessee.

JSeahawks wrote:I wasnt certain about Rain Forest, because I have always heard that the Olympic Peninsula is the only rain forest in the U.S. but apparently thats just you Washingtonian's spreading misinformation. Internet research shows that Washington, Oregon, and Northern California all have Temperate rain forest.

Apparently there's also small area's of rain forest in the southern Appalachian mountains in North Carolina, Georgia and Tennessee.

That's because WA state is the only place that has real rain forest in the U.S. An urban block-sized piece here or there doesn't count. Ignoring the "forest" part of "rain forest" to get by on a technicality is rubbish. It's like how Seattlites call what happens here during the winter "rain". It's not rain, it's misting the vast majority of the time, occasionally reaching "light rain" status, and once in a great while, warranting being called actual "rain".

You remind me of some of the people I knew in Wisconsin. They thought they had some mountains there, in the state of Wisconsin; because some places were called "Mount so-and-so", and actually managed to get higher than 50 feet above street level in Milwaukee or Madison. That doesn't turn your little wannabe mole hill into a mountain, even if it might meet some obscure technical definition for one.

memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=1010

That's the best proof we have

RolandDeschain wrote:

JSeahawks wrote:I wasnt certain about Rain Forest, because I have always heard that the Olympic Peninsula is the only rain forest in the U.S. but apparently thats just you Washingtonian's spreading misinformation. Internet research shows that Washington, Oregon, and Northern California all have Temperate rain forest.

Apparently there's also small area's of rain forest in the southern Appalachian mountains in North Carolina, Georgia and Tennessee.

You remind me of some of the people I knew in Wisconsin. They thought they had some mountains there, in the state of Wisconsin; because some places were called "Mount so-and-so", and actually managed to get higher than 50 feet above street level in Milwaukee or Madison. That doesn't turn your little wannabe mole hill into a mountain, even if it might meet some obscure technical definition for one.

Whatevs...

J, meet Cascade Mountain, one of Wisconsin's premier skiing places. I'm 100% serious, here's their website: http://www.cascademountain.com/

Here it is. No, this isn't a trick, or a joke; this little mosquito-bump of a hill is "Cascade Mountain", 30 minutes from Madison. I've driven by it a hundred times in my life, and every single time, I've exhibited a laugh, snort, smirk, or giggle, depending on the circumstances. This is the definition of a "ski resort" for Wisconsinites.

RolandDeschain wrote:J, meet Cascade Mountain, one of Wisconsin's premier skiing places. I'm 100% serious, here's their website: http://www.cascademountain.com/

Here it is. No, this isn't a trick, or a joke; this little mosquito-bump of a hill is "Cascade Mountain", 30 minutes from Madison. I've driven by it a hundred times in my life, and every single time, I've exhibited a laugh, snort, smirk, or giggle, depending on the circumstances. This is the definition of a "ski resort" for Wisconsinites.

Last time I was back in Wisconsin, I saw the sign for this while my wife and I were driving to Watertown to my grandparents, and I made the
mistake of looking up 5 degrees. Needless to say I missed it.

Sarlacc, I'm truly and honestly sorry that you have to visit Wisconsin to see family.

Hell, you should see "Mt." Scott here, it makes me laugh.

RolandDeschain wrote:Sarlacc, I'm truly and honestly sorry that you have to visit Wisconsin to see family.

Bet it makes you cringe to find out that I have to go back for a week this year to show my kid off to multiple sets of grandparents. Great way to spend my vacation time and a couple thousand dollars. (except, in this case, that's not a whistle.)

Tell those country bumpkins to retire to the northwest if they want to see their grandkid(s).

AbsolutNET wrote:http://www.seahawks.net/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=1010

That's the best proof we have

Think you're funny, don't you?

peachesenregalia wrote:

AbsolutNET wrote:http://www.seahawks.net/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=1010

That's the best proof we have

Think you're funny, don't you?

I chuckled.

Arizona & Montana >>>> Washington though.

I'm not sure if its Oklahoma sucks or the fact that Texas blows.

I lived in Bakersfield Ca. which sucks bad and it was mainly because it is the second richest concentration of okies second only to oklahoma. They migrated during the dust bowl, settled and made it suck.