[pretzellogician]

"extremely homogenous and flat" is a common sentiment, but.. it's just not true.

Flat for example. The southern portion of the Midwest can be quite hilly (the northern portion not as much, due to glaciers).

But even there, the definition of "flat" gets confused with "not mountainous". If the topography varies a lot, but there aren't mountains, is it flat? (Max/min vs variance)

[packetlost]

The driftless area certainly has some truly beautiful parts, but my statement is less about the homogeneity across the entire region and more about the distance between any notable landmarks. Hills alone aren't really that interesting either and I stand by my statement that most of the Midwest is boring and flat.