this post was submitted on 22 Jul 2024
341 points (91.1% liked)

Science Memes

10853 readers
2642 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.

Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.

Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
341
You think you just fell out of a coconut tree? (mander.xyz)
submitted 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
75 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] [email protected] 39 points 3 months ago (2 children)

This is a reminder that there is no universally accepted botanical definition of tree. It is also a reminder that usage supersedes definition, so pointing out that coconut palm trees aren't "trees" makes you both annoying and wrong.

[โ€“] [email protected] 12 points 3 months ago (1 children)

The definition of tree exists within the context of all that came before it? ๐ŸŒด

[โ€“] [email protected] 2 points 3 months ago

Only in the context of biology and evolution, which the right doesn't understand.

[โ€“] [email protected] 0 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (2 children)

Mmmmm, I'd say specialists would not use the broader definitions that are more colloquial in nature. Language depends on the user and their purpose/intent. Generally, trees are woody plants with secondary growth and they aren't monocots. It's not a hard boundary, but really depends on context.

[โ€“] [email protected] 6 points 3 months ago

Oak trees are more closely related to palm trees than they are to pine trees. It would be pretty arbitrary to exclude monocots but still include magnolids and gymnosperms.

Even from a purely structural perspective, they're all tall and have wood and leaves. Palm trees and banana trees don't have woody branches, but joshua trees do. I guess there's a difference that no monocot tree has heartwood, but you'll still need a chainsaw to saw through the trunk of a palm tree.

[โ€“] [email protected] 8 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C3&q=coconut+tree

Someone should tell the authors of these hundreds of papers then.

You do realize the qualifiers you edited in are exactly my point and directly contradict your post, right?

[โ€“] [email protected] -2 points 3 months ago (1 children)
[โ€“] [email protected] 7 points 3 months ago (1 children)

There's no way you actually read that.

It's literally a blog post of one person's opinion which concludes without a definitive statement, that it's not settled if they're trees or not, and then links to a page "for further reading" that categorizes them under trees.

[โ€“] [email protected] -1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

I did and I agree with the author. You do not have to agree with us. It's a form vs function argument. There is not a "right absolute" answer, it's about how you approach the question.

[โ€“] [email protected] 7 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

then we agree that it's incorrect to definitively say that a "palm tree" is not a tree.

rigidly defending the boundaries of a biological category that's not a monophylitic group is an exercise in futility. or maybe in linguistics, because if it's not monophyletic it's not "real" in an evolutionary sense and the question is in the cultural realm and somewhat subjective. It's like the discussions about whether a certain food is a fruit/vegetable/etc.

[โ€“] [email protected] 2 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

I see it as a paradox. :) I don't like calling them trees. I just call them palms.