At vero eos et accusamus et iusto odio dignissimos ducimus qui blanditiis praesentium voluptatum deleniti atque corrupti quos dolores et quas molestias excepturi sint occaecati cupiditate non provident, similique sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollitia animi, id est laborum et dolorum fuga.
Et harum quidem rerum facilis est et expedita distinctio. Nam libero tempore, cum soluta nobis est eligendi optio cumque nihil impedit quo minus id quod maxime placeat facere possimus, omnis voluptas assumenda est, omnis dolor repellendus.
Itaque earum rerum hic tenetur a sapiente delectus, ut aut reiciendis voluptatibus maiores alias consequatur aut perferendis doloribus asperiores repellat.
This portion of the sentence is correct. I have to dash -- I can explain more fully later on today, if you would like.
The phrase "you like the most in nature" is short for "that you like the most in nature" -- the "that" is optional here -- but with the "that" in place, you can see that it is a relative clause. Relative clauses are adjectival clauses, meaning they function like adjectives -- they modify nouns.
This relative clause modifies "things" -- it tells *which* things you are talking about: those you like most in nature. The clause modifies the noun subject, but it stands apart from it in terms of the syntax. By that I mean, it does not goven the verb "are."
If you were to diagram it out, you'd have "things" and "are" on the main horizontal line, with a dividing vertical line between them, intersecting the main line. That's the core of the start of this sentence. The relative clause would jut off the word "things" on a series of lines below the main line, showing in visual form that these words are not part of the syntax of the core sentence. Modifiers are never part of the core sentence.
Does that make sense? Let me know if not.