GardenBanter.co.uk

GardenBanter.co.uk (https://www.gardenbanter.co.uk/)
-   Plant Science (https://www.gardenbanter.co.uk/plant-science/)
-   -   leaves of a tree (https://www.gardenbanter.co.uk/plant-science/83567-leaves-tree.html)

Cereus-validus 22-09-2004 07:50 PM

Seems you are once again in full troll mood, Rinkytink.

What's the matter? Did your pet rat die?

No matter what you say, up isn't down and black isn't white.


"P van Rijckevorsel" wrote in message
...
Cereus-validus schreef
Welwitschia has a single woody stem arising from a deep taproot. The

flowering crown is raised well above the ground level on a woody trunk. It
most definitely is a tree.

*****
To somebody who never gets beyond reading comic books, sure.
PvR







Cereus-validus 22-09-2004 08:00 PM

You may as well ignore the nonsense Rinkytink says. It is obvious that he is
going out of his way to be contrary and obnoxious no matter what the facts
are. Size is relative and quantitative not qualitative. That may a major
concern when the dude is hung like a chihuahua but it isn't relative to what
defines a tree.


"Iris Cohen" wrote in message
...
By most definitions bonsai are not trees.

Why not? They meet all the criteria except size, and as I said before,

they
REPRESENT a full size tree. Are you going to suggest that a chihuahua is

not a
dog?
Iris,
Central NY, Zone 5a, Sunset Zone 40
"If we see light at the end of the tunnel, It's the light of the oncoming
train."
Robert Lowell (1917-1977)




Cereus-validus 22-09-2004 08:04 PM

Absolute nonsense. Size is quantative not qualitative and not part of most
definitions.

If we go by size alone, it probably could be said that Rinkytink is too
small to be a man!!!


"P van Rijckevorsel" wrote in message
...
By most definitions bonsai are not trees.


Iris Cohen schreef
Why not? They meet all the criteria except size, and as I said before,

they REPRESENT a full size tree.

****
Size is part of most definitions, and bonsai are well short of the minimum
required by those definitions. One might say that a requirement for a

bonsai
is that it must be too small to be a tree.
PvR




Sean Houtman 22-09-2004 08:14 PM

"Cereus-validus" wrote in
. com:




Actually, by definition, Welwitschia is a tree because it has a
single unbranched woody trunk!!!! That it has only two leaves
is besides the point.


Odd definition, most definitions of trees include some means of
distinguishing them from shrubs, generally height. Do you mean to
imply that if a woody plant has branches on the trunk, or more
than one trunk, that it must not be a tree? If so, there aren't
very many species that manage to be trees.


As Iris has already pointed out, the definition of what
constitutes a tree has absolutely nothing to do with height,
number of leaves or number of branches at all.

Most trees obviously do have branches arising from the trunk but
not the base.

Mulberries are actually trees not shrubs because they have a
single main woody trunk. They do not branch primarily from the
base as do shrubs.

I suppose if you actually bothered to look up the definitions of
the terms in a botanical dictionary it would boggle your mind and
incorrect preconceived notions.

There are actually many more tree species found around the world
than you will see sitting behind your 'puter looking out your
window. Try going out into the real world. You might actually
learn something on your own.


Exacly what part of Iris' description includes any definition, or even
a mention of height? I admit that she did post a definition that
mentioned height, but that was posted after your post was.

I take it you have never seen a wild mulberry. They are a great example
of branching primarily at the base. The ones that you purchase from a
nursery have been pruned to a single stem, allowing them to be trees.

I have not only looked up the term in a dictionary, but I have also
looked up a few other things... Fer instance, "tuberous root"
"taproot" and even "Netkook" (how cute, there is a picture of you
there). Here is the definition offered by The Complete Trees of North
America, by Thomas Elias: Trees are woody plants that usually grow to
at least 5 m (16 ft) tall and have a single trunk. A shrub, by
contrast, is typically a multiple-stemmed woody plant with more than
one dominant stem, and shrubs are normally less than 5 m (16 ft) tall.
Most woody plants can be identified easily as either a tree or a shrub.


If it is underground, it isn't a trunk, just like if it is underground,
it isn't a stolon. Just being woody and over 10 feet long doesn't make
something a trunk, otherwise Cucurbita foetidissima would be classified
as a tree, as its tuberous root can be much over 10 feet long, and
quite woody, with rings and everything. Mesquite, (Prosopis glandulosa)
generally is less than 10 feet tall above ground, but the taproots can
extend many feet underground (100 feet has been measured), all of those
basal branches must be fooling us, and the shrub is really a tree! Look
up Phreatophyte some time.


Sean



Sean Houtman 22-09-2004 08:25 PM

(Iris Cohen) wrote in
:

most definitions of trees include some means of
distinguishing them from shrubs, generally height.


The one I am familiar with is that a shrub is a woody plant which
is usually under ten feet tall & has multiple stems. A tree is
usually over ten feet tall & usually has a single stem.
What about dwarf trees which are way under ten feet tall & might
have multiple trunks, like a dwarf birch? I would assume if the
standard plant is a tree, the dwarf form is also called a tree.
Tsuga canadensis 'Minuta' is still a tree, albeit 3" tall.

Iris,
Central NY, Zone 5a, Sunset Zone 40
"If we see light at the end of the tunnel, It's the light of the
oncoming train."
Robert Lowell (1917-1977)


Quercus havardii generally only gets about a meter high, a dwarf
birch may be the result of breeding, sport, or a species tendency to
be small. If those are the cases, then it is a shrub. You can prune
elms to stay shrub sized, and they are shrubs till you let them go.
If you breed something to change its form, you have guess
what...changed its form. The T. canadensis 'Minuta' wouldn't be a
tree if it never gets over 3 inches tall, or even if it doesn't get
over 3 feet tall, just as a human dwarf or midget isn't going to
find clothes in the Big & Tall section. Still a human, but not a
giant.

Sean


Sean Houtman 22-09-2004 08:37 PM

(Iris Cohen) wrote in
:

By most definitions bonsai are not trees.

Why not? They meet all the criteria except size, and as I said
before, they REPRESENT a full size tree. Are you going to suggest
that a chihuahua is not a dog?
Iris,
Central NY, Zone 5a, Sunset Zone 40
"If we see light at the end of the tunnel, It's the light of the
oncoming train."
Robert Lowell (1917-1977)


Chihuahuas are still dogs, because they fit into the size range that
is part of the definition of a dog. Juniperus sabina is often sold
to newbies for bonsai, they can be made to represent a tree, but
don't typically get to tree size in the wild. There are still a few
women alive who had their feet bound as children, their feet are
very small as a result. Are you saying that they really have size 8
feet?

Sean


Cereus-validus 23-09-2004 12:48 AM

The woody trunk of a Welwitschia is held above the ground level, oh
uninformed one.

Like I said before Sean, you should stop looking up things on your 'puter
and go out and look at the actual plants in the real world. Or is that too
much like real work for you?

There are several feral mulberries (Morus alba) growing along the fence in
the field behind my house, numbnuts. There is also one that I have been
trying to eradicate from my yard that insists on sprouting from the roots.
So I can confidently say that I have more than enough first-hand knowledge
of the weed tree. I have also investigated a few back yards that have been
infested with Morus rubra. Lovely leaves but still a nasty weed.

There are several trees that will sucker from the base, especially when
damaged. One of the most notorious offenders are Silver Maple and Quaking
Aspen. That does not mean they are not true trees. That only means they have
developed weedy tendencies in response to damage from frequent predation.

That's funny. When I look up "Netkook", I find a picture of your mother
giving birth to you, Sean!!!


"Sean Houtman" wrote in message
news:1095880451.22ApWtUobLBcpWdCj0DoNg@teranews...
"Cereus-validus" wrote in
. com:




Actually, by definition, Welwitschia is a tree because it has a
single unbranched woody trunk!!!! That it has only two leaves
is besides the point.


Odd definition, most definitions of trees include some means of
distinguishing them from shrubs, generally height. Do you mean to
imply that if a woody plant has branches on the trunk, or more
than one trunk, that it must not be a tree? If so, there aren't
very many species that manage to be trees.


As Iris has already pointed out, the definition of what
constitutes a tree has absolutely nothing to do with height,
number of leaves or number of branches at all.

Most trees obviously do have branches arising from the trunk but
not the base.

Mulberries are actually trees not shrubs because they have a
single main woody trunk. They do not branch primarily from the
base as do shrubs.

I suppose if you actually bothered to look up the definitions of
the terms in a botanical dictionary it would boggle your mind and
incorrect preconceived notions.

There are actually many more tree species found around the world
than you will see sitting behind your 'puter looking out your
window. Try going out into the real world. You might actually
learn something on your own.


Exacly what part of Iris' description includes any definition, or even
a mention of height? I admit that she did post a definition that
mentioned height, but that was posted after your post was.

I take it you have never seen a wild mulberry. They are a great example
of branching primarily at the base. The ones that you purchase from a
nursery have been pruned to a single stem, allowing them to be trees.

I have not only looked up the term in a dictionary, but I have also
looked up a few other things... Fer instance, "tuberous root"
"taproot" and even "Netkook" (how cute, there is a picture of you
there). Here is the definition offered by The Complete Trees of North
America, by Thomas Elias: Trees are woody plants that usually grow to
at least 5 m (16 ft) tall and have a single trunk. A shrub, by
contrast, is typically a multiple-stemmed woody plant with more than
one dominant stem, and shrubs are normally less than 5 m (16 ft) tall.
Most woody plants can be identified easily as either a tree or a shrub.


If it is underground, it isn't a trunk, just like if it is underground,
it isn't a stolon. Just being woody and over 10 feet long doesn't make
something a trunk, otherwise Cucurbita foetidissima would be classified
as a tree, as its tuberous root can be much over 10 feet long, and
quite woody, with rings and everything. Mesquite, (Prosopis glandulosa)
generally is less than 10 feet tall above ground, but the taproots can
extend many feet underground (100 feet has been measured), all of those
basal branches must be fooling us, and the shrub is really a tree! Look
up Phreatophyte some time.


Sean





Iris Cohen 23-09-2004 03:28 AM

Not in any botany book I ever saw.

How about Trees of Southern Africa by Palgrave?
And another book of the same name by Palmer & Pitman. The reason you don't
often see it descibed in serious botanical books is that once the botanist
starts writing about it, he can't stop laughing.

Iris,
Central NY, Zone 5a, Sunset Zone 40
"If we see light at the end of the tunnel, It's the light of the oncoming
train."
Robert Lowell (1917-1977)

P van Rijckevorsel 23-09-2004 09:25 AM

Iris Cohen schreef
How about Trees of Southern Africa by Palgrave?


***
Touché! Point to you.

Not that you would recognise a tree from reading their description of
Welwitschia mirabilis. Maybe they just wanted an excuse to include this
oddity.
*****

And another book of the same name by Palmer & Pitman. The reason you don't

often see it descibed in serious botanical books is that once the botanist
starts writing about it, he can't stop laughing.

***
Actually Welwitschia is in lots of botany books, but never* described as a
tree. Reading a description of Welwitschia by a German botanist I don't
sense any laughter (with the author), but only a yawn (rising within
myself).
PvR

* Excepting the mentioned books




Iris Cohen 23-09-2004 12:37 PM

Not that you would recognise a tree from reading their description of
Welwitschia mirabilis.

OK. I have given several reasons why Welwitschia is a tree:
1. It is a conifer, in a group where almost all its relatives are trees.
2. It has a single definite woody trunk.
3. It has leaves coming out of the top.
4. It is a perennial.

Incidentally, besides pictures, I have met them personally.
Now tell me why Welwitschia is *not* a tree.

Reading a description of Welwitschia by a German botanist I don't sense any
laughter

German botanists don't count. Do any of them have a sense of humor? (I know one
personally, although he was born in Belgium.)
Iris,
Central NY, Zone 5a, Sunset Zone 40
"If we see light at the end of the tunnel, It's the light of the oncoming
train."
Robert Lowell (1917-1977)

Phred 23-09-2004 02:22 PM


Reading a description of Welwitschia by a German botanist I don't sense any
laughter

German botanists don't count. Do any of them have a sense of humor? (I know one
personally, although he was born in Belgium.)


This reminded me of a couple of things. Firstly, when I was in the US
some years ago, I noticed that all our old Irish jokes were told about
Poles. Presumably because the Irish have rather more influence over
there than they do here. :)

Secondly, some years ago I mentioned the Scottish characteristic of
parsimony (as seen by most of the rest of the world). This was
challenged by a Dutchman who pointed out that while the Scots had the
reputation, it was the Dutch who had the application to excel in this
endeavour. In fact, he pointed out that the Belgians had an old joke
that copper wire was invented by two Dutchmen fighting over a penny.


Cheers, Phred.

--
LID


Phred 23-09-2004 02:26 PM

In article ,
"Cereus-validus" wrote:
Is it true that in Oz you look at Baobobs standing on your head so that they
can seem to grow right-side up?


Hey, Celluloid! You need to broaden your horizons. Plenty of Baobabs
(assuming you did mean them) in this half of the globe. In fact I
would suggest they are properly more southern than northern:
Baum D A (1995) A systematic revision of Adansonia (Bombacaceae).
Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden, 82(3): 440-470

Sorry about your not being able to get a woody, bloker.


No worries Toy Boy.


Cheers, Phred.

--
LID


Cereus-validus 23-09-2004 02:46 PM

I know there are Baobabs in Oz.
That's why I mentioned them specifically, you fool.
You are getting dizzy constantly standing on your head living on the other
side of the looking glass, kangaroo boy.

"Phred" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Cereus-validus" wrote:
Is it true that in Oz you look at Baobobs standing on your head so that

they
can seem to grow right-side up?


Hey, Celluloid! You need to broaden your horizons. Plenty of Baobabs
(assuming you did mean them) in this half of the globe. In fact I
would suggest they are properly more southern than northern:
Baum D A (1995) A systematic revision of Adansonia (Bombacaceae).
Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden, 82(3): 440-470

Sorry about your not being able to get a woody, bloker.


No worries Toy Boy.


Cheers, Phred.

--
LID




P van Rijckevorsel 23-09-2004 04:49 PM

Phred schreef
Secondly, some years ago I mentioned the Scottish characteristic of
parsimony (as seen by most of the rest of the world). This was
challenged by a Dutchman who pointed out that while the Scots had the
reputation, it was the Dutch who had the application to excel in this
endeavour. In fact, he pointed out that the Belgians had an old joke
that copper wire was invented by two Dutchmen fighting over a penny.


*******
The Scots borrowed lots of things from the Dutch, like golf.
PvR



David Hershey 23-09-2004 11:14 PM

Tree definitions vary widely with minimum heights, often at maturity,
of 10, 12, 13, 15 or 20 feet or no specific minimum, just "tall." Some
limit trees to seed plants but seedless plants such as tree ferns,
giant horsetails and tree lycopods are usually considered trees. Most
definitions require that the stem be woody, which would probably
exclude banana, but at least one requires that a tree simply be tall.
Some definitions do not even require that a tree's main stem be
self-supporting so woody vines might qualify as trees by some of these
definitions.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&l...&q=define:tree
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=tree

The term tree can be applied to many bonsai but the definition of
bonsai itself includes a modification of plant size. The definition of
bonsai usually mentions a plant or tree that has been intentionally
miniaturized or dwarfed. The term miniaturized or dwarfed overrides
any height minimum in the definition of tree, as does "dwarf tree."
People may prefer to refer to a young specimen of a tree species as a
tree seedling, sapling or young tree to indicate that it had not yet
met the minimum height for a tree. In some areas, there are pygmy
forests where soils or environmental conditions limit mature tree
height to well below 10 feet. They are still trees but might better be
described as pygmy trees or dwarfed trees.

When used in tree rose, tree geranium, tree lantana, tree coleus, etc.
the meaning of tree is that the plant has a tree shape with a single
main stem and crown of foliage but does not necessarily meet the 10
foot-plus minimum height. Tree roses, tree geraniums, etc. are also
called standards. Woody vines, such as Wisteria spp. and Campsis
radicans, can be trained to have a single, self-supporting stem so
they look like trees but usually don't meet the 10 foot or more
minimum either.

So-called clump birch are sometimes the result of planting three
saplings in the same hole so they may represent multiple trees rather
than multiple trunks.

Welwitschia is often referred to as a tree or dwarf tree, which seems
reasonable.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&i...a+tree&spell=1



(Iris Cohen) wrote in message ...
most definitions of trees include some means of
distinguishing them from shrubs, generally height.


The one I am familiar with is that a shrub is a woody plant which is usually
under ten feet tall & has multiple stems. A tree is usually over ten feet tall
& usually has a single stem.
What about dwarf trees which are way under ten feet tall & might have multiple
trunks, like a dwarf birch? I would assume if the standard plant is a tree, the
dwarf form is also called a tree. Tsuga canadensis 'Minuta' is still a tree,
albeit 3" tall.

Iris,
Central NY, Zone 5a, Sunset Zone 40
"If we see light at the end of the tunnel, It's the light of the oncoming
train."
Robert Lowell (1917-1977)


Iris Cohen 24-09-2004 03:55 AM

In some areas, there are pygmy forests where soils or environmental
conditions limit mature tree height to well below 10 feet. They are still trees
but might better be described as pygmy trees or dwarfed trees.

There are areas in the rainforests like that. They are called elfin forest. In
the dry areas of California, it is called chaparral. In the countries around
the Mediterranean, it is called maqui.
Iris,
Central NY, Zone 5a, Sunset Zone 40
"If we see light at the end of the tunnel, It's the light of the oncoming
train."
Robert Lowell (1917-1977)

P van Rijckevorsel 24-09-2004 07:25 AM

David Hershey schreef
Welwitschia is often referred to as a tree or dwarf tree, which seems
reasonable.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&i...a+tree&spell=1


********
A tenuous line of reasoning!
Welwitschia (only) gives 14200 hits
Welwitschia plant gives 4270 hits
Welwitschia tree gives 3110 hits
Welwitschia car gives 2640 hits
"Welwitschia plant" gives 322 hits
"Welwitschia tree" gives 4 hits

Going by number of hits and by this line of reasoning the idea that
Welwitschia is a car is almost as likely as the idea that it is a tree.

You might as well say that as 4/322 = 0.0124 that the idea that Welwitschia
is a tree has a presence well below the 5% border and is statististically
not significant.

Actually the first listed hit for Welwitschia
http://www.namibweb.com/welwitschia.htm
has it pretty much right:
" The plant resembles a woody carrot. "

PvR











Cereus-validus 24-09-2004 08:58 AM

That only goes to prove that using hits on the internet as a source for
statistical data is INSANE.

That's almost as bad as asking people on the street advice on quantum
mechanics.


"P van Rijckevorsel" wrote in message
...
David Hershey schreef
Welwitschia is often referred to as a tree or dwarf tree, which seems
reasonable.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&i...a+tree&spell=1


********
A tenuous line of reasoning!
Welwitschia (only) gives 14200 hits
Welwitschia plant gives 4270 hits
Welwitschia tree gives 3110 hits
Welwitschia car gives 2640 hits
"Welwitschia plant" gives 322 hits
"Welwitschia tree" gives 4 hits

Going by number of hits and by this line of reasoning the idea that
Welwitschia is a car is almost as likely as the idea that it is a tree.

You might as well say that as 4/322 = 0.0124 that the idea that

Welwitschia
is a tree has a presence well below the 5% border and is statististically
not significant.

Actually the first listed hit for Welwitschia
http://www.namibweb.com/welwitschia.htm
has it pretty much right:
" The plant resembles a woody carrot. "

PvR




Phred 24-09-2004 02:13 PM

In article , (Iris Cohen) wrote:
In some areas, there are pygmy forests where soils or environmental
conditions limit mature tree height to well below 10 feet. They are still trees
but might better be described as pygmy trees or dwarfed trees.

There are areas in the rainforests like that. They are called elfin forest. In
the dry areas of California, it is called chaparral. In the countries around
the Mediterranean, it is called maqui.


There are areas of "heath" vegetation on mountain slopes here in NE Oz
where combinations of poor soil, restricted water, and high wind, have
created dwarf forests of nornal tree species. For example, I recall
an area on an exposed ridge near Lakeland (SW of Cooktown) where
_Eucalyptus_ species were seeding at below knee height.


Cheers, Phred.

--
LID


Christopher Green 24-09-2004 08:55 PM

(Iris Cohen) wrote in message ...
In some areas, there are pygmy forests where soils or environmental
conditions limit mature tree height to well below 10 feet. They are still trees
but might better be described as pygmy trees or dwarfed trees.

There are areas in the rainforests like that. They are called elfin forest. In
the dry areas of California, it is called chaparral. In the countries around
the Mediterranean, it is called maqui.
Iris,
Central NY, Zone 5a, Sunset Zone 40
"If we see light at the end of the tunnel, It's the light of the oncoming
train."
Robert Lowell (1917-1977)


Chaparral and maqui are something different from pygmy or elfin
forests or krummholz. (In California, what people think of as
chaparral is formally "coastal sage scrub".) It supports oaks and
other trees of considerable size. But the flora characteristic of
these regions consists mainly of species that do not naturally have
the habit of trees, not of tree species dwarfed by environmental
conditions.

--
Chris Green

Iris Cohen 24-09-2004 09:58 PM

Chaparral and maqui are something different from pygmy or elfin forests or
krummholz. (In California, what people think of as chaparral is formally
"coastal sage scrub".) It supports oaks and other trees of considerable size.
But the flora characteristic of these regions consists mainly of species that
do not naturally have the habit of trees, not of tree species dwarfed by
environmental conditions.

Thanks for the clarification. Exactly what is krummholz & where would I find
one?
Iris,
Central NY, Zone 5a, Sunset Zone 40
"If we see light at the end of the tunnel, It's the light of the oncoming
train."
Robert Lowell (1917-1977)

Peter Jason 25-09-2004 04:17 AM

Curious. Just today I asked this question of a snot-nosed, unwashed,
dishevelled, smelly piece of street trash leaning agaist a post, and golly
gosh! I received a lecture on quantum mechanics (including the
Schrodinger's cat example) together with the applications to chemical bonds
and Reimann geometry and the solution thereto! Clearly Cereus Invalidus
Trollus Semper Est sure aint very street smart.

"Cereus-validus" wrote in message
m...
That only goes to prove that using hits on the internet as a source for
statistical data is INSANE.

That's almost as bad as asking people on the street advice on quantum
mechanics.


"P van Rijckevorsel" wrote in message
...
David Hershey schreef
Welwitschia is often referred to as a tree or dwarf tree, which seems
reasonable.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&i...a+tree&spell=1


********
A tenuous line of reasoning!
Welwitschia (only) gives 14200 hits
Welwitschia plant gives 4270 hits
Welwitschia tree gives 3110 hits
Welwitschia car gives 2640 hits
"Welwitschia plant" gives 322 hits
"Welwitschia tree" gives 4 hits

Going by number of hits and by this line of reasoning the idea that
Welwitschia is a car is almost as likely as the idea that it is a tree.

You might as well say that as 4/322 = 0.0124 that the idea that

Welwitschia
is a tree has a presence well below the 5% border and is

statististically
not significant.

Actually the first listed hit for Welwitschia
http://www.namibweb.com/welwitschia.htm
has it pretty much right:
" The plant resembles a woody carrot. "

PvR






Cereus-validus 25-09-2004 04:48 AM

The definition of a tree for Peter is something he usually wakes up under
after one of his all night benders!!!

So you say you are still getting acid flashbacks from the 60's? You really
are one hard core dead head!!!

You sure that wasn't actually Fat Freddie's cat you were getting that
lecture on while you were toking on that herbal bong?

(Too bad none of the European curmudgeons won't understand one word of this
posting. They might have been too busy goose-stepping to the oldies at the
time.)


"Peter Jason" wrote in message
...
Curious. Just today I asked this question of a snot-nosed, unwashed,
dishevelled, smelly piece of street trash leaning agaist a post, and golly
gosh! I received a lecture on quantum mechanics (including the
Schrodinger's cat example) together with the applications to chemical

bonds
and Reimann geometry and the solution thereto! Clearly Cereus Invalidus
Trollus Semper Est sure aint very street smart.

"Cereus-validus" wrote in message
m...
That only goes to prove that using hits on the internet as a source for
statistical data is INSANE.

That's almost as bad as asking people on the street advice on quantum
mechanics.


"P van Rijckevorsel" wrote in message
...
David Hershey schreef
Welwitschia is often referred to as a tree or dwarf tree, which

seems
reasonable.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&i...a+tree&spell=1

********
A tenuous line of reasoning!
Welwitschia (only) gives 14200 hits
Welwitschia plant gives 4270 hits
Welwitschia tree gives 3110 hits
Welwitschia car gives 2640 hits
"Welwitschia plant" gives 322 hits
"Welwitschia tree" gives 4 hits

Going by number of hits and by this line of reasoning the idea that
Welwitschia is a car is almost as likely as the idea that it is a

tree.

You might as well say that as 4/322 = 0.0124 that the idea that

Welwitschia
is a tree has a presence well below the 5% border and is

statististically
not significant.

Actually the first listed hit for Welwitschia
http://www.namibweb.com/welwitschia.htm
has it pretty much right:
" The plant resembles a woody carrot. "

PvR








Peter Jason 25-09-2004 08:12 AM

It appears our little Troll-in-training has respect neither for his elders
nor his betters!

This trite little motor-mouth is so busy talking that there is no time for
listening.

Tsk! Tsk!

In his wanton youth the rod was spared, and the child spoiled. O the pity
of it...!!!

A few goods whacks applied with resolve would cure him pronto.

In the meantime I'll cure one of his too-numerous-to-mention neuroses: Vis:

A tree is a plant one can climb.

Now, wasn't that EASY...!!!

Shutup, listen and learn Cereus Serious Trollum Magnus est.



"Cereus-validus" wrote in message
om...
The definition of a tree for Peter is something he usually wakes up under
after one of his all night benders!!!

So you say you are still getting acid flashbacks from the 60's? You really
are one hard core dead head!!!

You sure that wasn't actually Fat Freddie's cat you were getting that
lecture on while you were toking on that herbal bong?

(Too bad none of the European curmudgeons won't understand one word of

this
posting. They might have been too busy goose-stepping to the oldies at the
time.)


"Peter Jason" wrote in message
...
Curious. Just today I asked this question of a snot-nosed, unwashed,
dishevelled, smelly piece of street trash leaning agaist a post, and

golly
gosh! I received a lecture on quantum mechanics (including the
Schrodinger's cat example) together with the applications to chemical

bonds
and Reimann geometry and the solution thereto! Clearly Cereus

Invalidus
Trollus Semper Est sure aint very street smart.

"Cereus-validus" wrote in message
m...
That only goes to prove that using hits on the internet as a source

for
statistical data is INSANE.

That's almost as bad as asking people on the street advice on quantum
mechanics.


"P van Rijckevorsel" wrote in message
...
David Hershey schreef
Welwitschia is often referred to as a tree or dwarf tree, which

seems
reasonable.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&i...a+tree&spell=1

********
A tenuous line of reasoning!
Welwitschia (only) gives 14200 hits
Welwitschia plant gives 4270 hits
Welwitschia tree gives 3110 hits
Welwitschia car gives 2640 hits
"Welwitschia plant" gives 322 hits
"Welwitschia tree" gives 4 hits

Going by number of hits and by this line of reasoning the idea that
Welwitschia is a car is almost as likely as the idea that it is a

tree.

You might as well say that as 4/322 = 0.0124 that the idea that
Welwitschia
is a tree has a presence well below the 5% border and is

statististically
not significant.

Actually the first listed hit for Welwitschia
http://www.namibweb.com/welwitschia.htm
has it pretty much right:
" The plant resembles a woody carrot. "

PvR










Iris Cohen 25-09-2004 02:05 PM

" The plant resembles a woody carrot. "

Does not. That's a description of Fouquieria columnaris. The top part of
Welwitschia, which is the part you usually see, looks like what you throw in
the garbage after you made the salad.
Iris,
Central NY, Zone 5a, Sunset Zone 40
"If we see light at the end of the tunnel, It's the light of the oncoming
train."
Robert Lowell (1917-1977)

P van Rijckevorsel 25-09-2004 05:21 PM

" The plant resembles a woody carrot. "

Iris Cohen schreef
Does not. That's a description of Fouquieria columnaris. The top part of
Welwitschia, which is the part you usually see, looks like what you throw

in the garbage after you made the salad.

********
Ah, you are basing your botanical definitions on what you see and how you
would use it in the kitchen. That explains a lot.
PvR







Cereus-validus 25-09-2004 11:50 PM

One can conclude from that remark from Rinkytink that he has seen neither a
Welwitschia nor a carrot.


"Iris Cohen" wrote in message
...
" The plant resembles a woody carrot. "

Does not. That's a description of Fouquieria columnaris. The top part of
Welwitschia, which is the part you usually see, looks like what you throw

in
the garbage after you made the salad.
Iris,
Central NY, Zone 5a, Sunset Zone 40
"If we see light at the end of the tunnel, It's the light of the oncoming
train."
Robert Lowell (1917-1977)




Cereus-validus 25-09-2004 11:55 PM

One can conclude from the remarks from Rinkytink that he has never seen a
Welwitschia nor a carrot.

Also one can conclude that he has no proficiency in the kitchen either. If
it wasn't for fast food and bumming off acquaintances, he probably would
starve to death. With his equal knowledge of wild plants, if he was stranded
in a forest, he would starve.


"P van Rijckevorsel" wrote in message
...
" The plant resembles a woody carrot. "


Iris Cohen schreef
Does not. That's a description of Fouquieria columnaris. The top part of
Welwitschia, which is the part you usually see, looks like what you

throw
in the garbage after you made the salad.

********
Ah, you are basing your botanical definitions on what you see and how you
would use it in the kitchen. That explains a lot.
PvR




Sean Houtman 28-09-2004 04:17 AM

Zeitkind wrote in news:cim7b5$tgq$03$2
@news.t-online.com:

Sean Houtman wrote:

generally height.


So.. all bonsai are shrubs?






Sorry.. couldn't resist.. ;)


No, some bonsai are herbs. If you bonsai a giant redwood, would it
still not be tiny at 20 feet?

Sean


Roger Whitehead 29-09-2004 08:31 AM

In article , Phred wrote:
the Belgians had an old joke
that copper wire was invented by two Dutchmen fighting over a penny.


8-)

Roger (who has found people in both nations to be generous)


Cereus-validus 29-09-2004 12:19 PM

How great the white man's burden must be!!!

So why was he named for a pimple?


"Roger Whitehead" wrote in message
...
In article , Phred wrote:
the Belgians had an old joke
that copper wire was invented by two Dutchmen fighting over a penny.


8-)

Roger (who has found people in both nations to be generous)




Peter Jason 30-09-2004 02:00 AM

Aw gee! Just like a cactus-geek affecting
latinisms.............................!!

"Cereus-validus" wrote in message
...
How great the white man's burden must be!!!

So why was he named for a pimple?


"Roger Whitehead" wrote in message
...
In article , Phred wrote:
the Belgians had an old joke
that copper wire was invented by two Dutchmen fighting over a penny.


8-)

Roger (who has found people in both nations to be generous)








All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:20 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
GardenBanter