What on Earth is that bird's definition of an "herb"? A pretty uncontroversial definition from Wikipedia:
Herbs generally refers to the leafy green or flowering parts of a plant (either fresh or dried), while spices are usually dried and produced from other parts of the plant, including seeds, bark, roots and fruits.
And what the goddamn hell is "true wood" supposed to distinguish? Do plants grow the faux wood that I can buy at Lowe's? Rosemary is a woody shrub and, like basil, is in the family Lamiaceae with a bunch of other herbs.
"Shrubs" and "herbs" are not mutually exclusive (and basil isn't a shrub – a woody perennial – anyway). wtaf is the logic here; there's pedantry, and then there's fucking nonsense pulled out of thin air.
Edit: Wait, is the comic talking about herbaceous plants (shortened in botany as “herbs”)? Because in that case, 1) that’s not news in botanical terms for rosemary, 2) basil is an herbaceous annual, 3) why did it single out rosemary and basil if it didn’t mean to imply a culinary sense, and 4) still what the hell did it mean by “true wood”? It’s simultaneously less and more confusing.
And what the goddamn hell is “true wood” supposed to distinguish?
I suppose if it contains lignin, it's really wood, otherwise it just kinda looks like wood at best. If it's real wood, most animals, with a few exceptions here and there, cannot directly digest it.
The other side of this coin is that the banana is the largest herb; the banana tree is the tallest plant that doesn't produce wood
Of course mixing up culinary and botany meanings deliberately is dumb and leads to people saying things like "a tomato is a fruit" and "a strawberry isn't a berry" those people can go produce their own wood if you know what I mean
congrats on being the millionth person in this thread including the original artist to not know that words can have one meaning in a scientific context and another different meaning in a culinary context
here's some more that will blow your mind, peanuts aren't nuts, peanut butter isn't butter, starfish aren't fish, wow much learn
Berries are supposed to be bulbous and smooth. The only berry I can come up with that kinda has strawberry features is a raspberry because it's more squishy. But even then, it has a lot of the little balls, like a blackberry. Strawberries just don't look like a berry.
Bayberries/waxberries aren't really smootth, and Yewberries aren't very bulbous.
Haskap berries are lumpy and mealy, are they not berries?
Do groundcherries count with their paper husk? Tomatillos? Cherry Tomatos?
Are cherries berries? Rose hips?
Cherry chili peppers are bulbous and smooth, are they berries?
Raspberries and blackberries often have little hairs growing off of each fruit, does that mean they're not smooth? If hair is ok, kiwifruit are bulbous, but hariy.
I feel like you're naming berries that don't look like most berries and non-berries that look like berries. I think you're actually kinda agreeing with me and making my point.
In this case, strawberries are not berries that also don't look like berries.
I'm pointing out flaws in your reasoning. Bulbous and small aren't good categories, especially when you recognized that raspberries are different.
I would contest that the nature of a cultural berry is being a small sweet fruit that typically wants to be eaten. Strawberries sit alongside gooseberries, raspberries, cherries, and all the other traditional berries in this. Strawberries are certainly unique in their structure, but that doesn't change how we eat them.
The botanical berry definition has little to do with the cultural definition besides taking the name. Try looking at the botanical definition of tree sometime. Does Bamboo count? Palm trees? Ginkgo? It's a strategy for than a rigid group.
Strawberries are not berries (but aggregate accessory fruits). Cucumber, watermelon and pumpkin belong to the same family of plants. Tomatoes are fruit. Well botanically, vegetables do not exist anyway. Vegetables are a social construct. Also, wheat is a kind of grass. Isn't our world beautiful?
On a related note, may I suggest "No such thing as fish" as a podcast? From QI-producers been going on since the episode with "no such thing as fish" thing
I feel compelled to advertise credit this artist. They have a ton of great works, and deserve the sales recognition. Support your local artists, and make sure people know who they are.
shrubabbaby
shrubry
shurubaby
i love this comics so much
So I should put them on sandwiches? 🤔
Does this suggest the existence of dom-shrubs?
Nnnnnnn..... yes?
True wood, indeed.
Absolutely. Basil with tomato, mozzarella, some spinach if you want to bulk it up and get more nutrients, and a balsamic glaze.
If the bread is still connected on your sub, is it technically a hotdog?
What on Earth is that bird's definition of an "herb"? A pretty uncontroversial definition from Wikipedia:
And what the goddamn hell is "true wood" supposed to distinguish? Do plants grow the faux wood that I can buy at Lowe's? Rosemary is a woody shrub and, like basil, is in the family Lamiaceae with a bunch of other herbs.
"Shrubs" and "herbs" are not mutually exclusive (and basil isn't a shrub – a woody perennial – anyway). wtaf is the logic here; there's pedantry, and then there's fucking nonsense pulled out of thin air.
Edit: Wait, is the comic talking about herbaceous plants (shortened in botany as “herbs”)? Because in that case, 1) that’s not news in botanical terms for rosemary, 2) basil is an herbaceous annual, 3) why did it single out rosemary and basil if it didn’t mean to imply a culinary sense, and 4) still what the hell did it mean by “true wood”? It’s simultaneously less and more confusing.
I suppose if it contains lignin, it's really wood, otherwise it just kinda looks like wood at best. If it's real wood, most animals, with a few exceptions here and there, cannot directly digest it.
I appreciate you trying to fill in the gaps that the comic leaves with its abject, ignorant nonsense masquerading as pedantry, but wood is more complicated than just the presence of lignin.
Otherwise, oops, wheat is wood.
The other side of this coin is that the banana is the largest herb; the banana tree is the tallest plant that doesn't produce wood
Of course mixing up culinary and botany meanings deliberately is dumb and leads to people saying things like "a tomato is a fruit" and "a strawberry isn't a berry" those people can go produce their own wood if you know what I mean
A strawberry isn't a berry. It's just small and has it in the name. It doesn't even look like a berry.
Also a banana isn't an herb. Just the banana tree is. The banana is a berry.
ugh
We did it, Lemmy.
🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉
...bananas are not herbs, dude. You don't dry a banana and mix it into other food. It's a fruit. You pick it, and eat it.
congrats on being the millionth person in this thread including the original artist to not know that words can have one meaning in a scientific context and another different meaning in a culinary context
here's some more that will blow your mind, peanuts aren't nuts, peanut butter isn't butter, starfish aren't fish, wow much learn
You've never had dehydrated bananas?
I've put them in oatmeal before.
How do strawberries not look like berries to you?
Berries are supposed to be bulbous and smooth. The only berry I can come up with that kinda has strawberry features is a raspberry because it's more squishy. But even then, it has a lot of the little balls, like a blackberry. Strawberries just don't look like a berry.
Bayberries/waxberries aren't really smootth, and Yewberries aren't very bulbous.
Haskap berries are lumpy and mealy, are they not berries?
Do groundcherries count with their paper husk? Tomatillos? Cherry Tomatos?
Are cherries berries? Rose hips?
Cherry chili peppers are bulbous and smooth, are they berries?
Raspberries and blackberries often have little hairs growing off of each fruit, does that mean they're not smooth? If hair is ok, kiwifruit are bulbous, but hariy.
I feel like you're naming berries that don't look like most berries and non-berries that look like berries. I think you're actually kinda agreeing with me and making my point.
In this case, strawberries are not berries that also don't look like berries.
I'm pointing out flaws in your reasoning. Bulbous and small aren't good categories, especially when you recognized that raspberries are different.
I would contest that the nature of a cultural berry is being a small sweet fruit that typically wants to be eaten. Strawberries sit alongside gooseberries, raspberries, cherries, and all the other traditional berries in this. Strawberries are certainly unique in their structure, but that doesn't change how we eat them.
The botanical berry definition has little to do with the cultural definition besides taking the name. Try looking at the botanical definition of tree sometime. Does Bamboo count? Palm trees? Ginkgo? It's a strategy for than a rigid group.
That reminds me, I must go check if the oregano is ready to harvest.
Edit: I'll check again in two weeks
To be honest people eat basil and rosemary leaves not the wood part. So the same could be said about bay leaves, no one bites the tree itself
You've never had cinnamon!?
What is this cinnamon shtick you speak of?
Wait... You guys dont bite trees?
Didn't know we had beavers here on Lemmy
You rang?
You must go to the tallest tree in these woods and cut it down. WITH . . . a haddock!
Herring. 😁
Dang.
Outstanding meme abuse.
Strawberries are not berries (but aggregate accessory fruits). Cucumber, watermelon and pumpkin belong to the same family of plants. Tomatoes are fruit. Well botanically, vegetables do not exist anyway. Vegetables are a social construct. Also, wheat is a kind of grass. Isn't our world beautiful?
How can vegetarians be real if our vegetables aren’t real?
Now you're asking the questions they don't want you to ask
It is beautiful, but you made it sound like Mexican food. It's all the same you can just do it differently and call it something else.
I get the idea planetologists got high of their own supply. What the fuck is up with all that?
The most sensical classification of species. Tracking shared traits and now shared DNA to group species by how recently they share an ancestor.
Bananas are berries
WHAT?
I fear a storm is coming
Rosemary does grow like a shrub if you let it. A regular size one.
Wait, basil?
Rosemary, I get (and also thyme, btw), but basil? At best, the dried out stalks of a basil can look a bit woody, but that's true for a lot of plants.
When Basil matures, especially after it flowers it gets pretty woody
Yup, gardeners are encouraged to cut off the tops of basil so that it doesn't flower (and then it doesn't turn woody).
Basil I forgot about and dried:
True wood? Wood was reinvented multiple times.
isn't it all just the same genes responsible for wood-making, getting switched on and off repeatedly?
There’s no such thing as a tree (phylogenetically)
Also, at least with germans coal deposits, they exists because bacteria/fungus first needed a few million years to learn to digest lignin.
On a related note, may I suggest "No such thing as fish" as a podcast? From QI-producers been going on since the episode with "no such thing as fish" thing
https://youtube.com/@nstaaf
Everyone in here talking about science and my stupid ass thought this was a reference to the song Scarborough fair
I feel compelled to
advertisecredit this artist. They have a ton of great works, and deserve thesalesrecognition. Support your local artists, and make sure people know who they are.False Knees
You cab find the other socials on their page.
Basilicum makes wood, obviously.
Herb
Say 'what' one more time motherfucker
I thought shrubs were defined from multiple stem growth
But is maple syrup a herb, or an herb?