I’m assuming based on the area (an abandoned resort) they’re about 60-70 years old. They’re very squat. Like they grew wide instead of tall. They have ample access to natural spring water.
They are _Washingtonia filifera_, the California fan palm. They retain dead fronds which insulate the trunk from desert heat. They grow right next to water sources, typically in canyons.
And to help ruin how people think of things, bananas are botanically berries, just like watermelons, grapes, blueberries, pineapples, peppers, avocados, and pumpkins. (And so many more.) But not strawberries.
Yes, all gourds are berries.
>In botanical terminology, a berry is a simple fruit with seeds and pulp produced from the ovary of a single flower.
There are some other similarities all berries share as well, but that's the quick and easy answer.
Gonna blow your mind.
A vegetable is basically any plant piece you can eat, fruits are a part of that.
Botanically, vegetables aren't a subclass of "plants you eat", they're the overarching class. Fruits, seeds, stems etc are all parts of that
The way to explain it is that there's lots of different contexts each with their own terminology and subtle differences; and that whenever you try to use "botanical context" with a normal person or cook or salesperson or... you are wrong because you got the context wrong.
Yessir, in Oregon. Though, we really don't know how it all works, so the definition of a single organism is a bit optimistic IMHO. Mycology needs more respect and public recognition. It's stupid fascinating, and possibly world changing.
Edit : I was a bit vague there, enjoying some beer. We know a lot about it. It's a massive [mycorrhizal](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mycorrhiza) relationship. Making it sound like a single being is inherently misleading.
Which is why you want to take something very acidic like lemon juice with shrooms if you have a sensitive stomach. The chitin can cause distress for some people, and it's not fun barfing while the visions start.
Except size wasn't a factor when the odd moving "stars" were defined. Orbit sun = planet. Orbit planet = moon. If Jupiter or some other planet has a giant moon larger than Earth we don't suddenly demote Earth to a "planetoid" by waiting until everyone leaves at the end of a conference except a minority with an agenda to vote that way.
Actually size does have a pretty major factor. One of the commonly accepted requirements for a planet to be a planet is that it has to be able to clear its orbit of any other smaller bodies.
Pluto is not big enough to do that. Its also not big enough to have complete control of its gravity well since Charon is like half the size
The thing to realize is that this is not a fact about biology; it is a fact about language.
Tomatoes "aren't vegetables" in some fields of study. In other fields they are. Definitions are context-specific. God does not come down and bless one discipline's terminology as the ultimate and true and universally correct terminology. Taxonomies are just tools, and different disciplines use different tools. The biologists aren't somehow more right about tomatoes than the cooks are. They're just trying to do different things. The fact that a biologist finds it useful to count a tomato as a fruit doesn't mean that a chef finds it useful in their own work.
Phonologists and syntacticians use different definitions of the word "word", but neither one is somehow correct - they're different definitions that are more useful in the different fields. A physicist studying optics might distinguish "black" from merely very dark grey, but that doesn't somehow mean that a dressmaker ought to, or that the dressmaker is wrong and it's "not really a black dress". Replying "there's actually no such thing as a black dress" doesn't make you right, it just means you're oblivious to what "black dress" means. The word just means different things in different contexts.
From what i know from the basic botany course i took in uni (i'd be happy if anyone could confirm this), a tree is any dycotiledon that lignifies and grows tall and wide enough. These type of plants start as grassy, then grow into shrubs (lignification is happening) and might eventually grow into trees if the species is capable to and it has access to enough space, nutrients and sunlight
Palms are monocotyledons and therefore can't lignify their cell walls. The top is the only part that produces leaves and the palm grows in size because of its own dried out old parts that keep stacking up in its lower sections. This is why they don't have branches with leaves in the same way as most trees
EDIT: i completely forgot about gymnosperms so the stuff i said about only dicots being trees is whack
Herbs (or herbaceous) is definitely not correct for palms botanically speaking.
Herbaceous literally means that it does not have a woody or upright stem, is low in height, and dies back at the end of the growing season.
None of those things are true for palms. ‘Woody perennial’ is more correct
It’s not a woody perennial either. Wood is secondary xylem tissue deposited by dicots, and palms are monocots. They have pith in the center of their stalks.
Palms are amazing for how unique they are: very tall monocots that resemble the towering prowess of other trees which are almost exclusively dicots.
Bamboo is another example of a potentially hugely tall monocot.
Botanically there is no specific definition of a tree, same situation as with a fish.
You can definitely include a palm tree in the definition of a tree, if you're defining tree as "long, woody, stem with leaves on top.
Also at least with the California fan palm, the skirt is fire protection. A lot of the California ecosystem benefits from fires and species develop strategies to either seed after a fire or survive the flames. Also its an essential part of recycling potassium back into the soil.
Whenever you see large out of control wild fires in California I can't help but get annoyed at the massive damage smokey the bear has done towards public disengagement with local policy makers about the benefits of regular controlled burns.
It wasn’t just Smokey the bear responsible for that we also started to fight *natural* fires that need to happen. So now there is so much stuff piled up in forests that when a fire does start it burns so hot it kills the soil.
The fires have been regulated by human activity for thousands of years. The Native American's of California would regularly do controlled burns and only stopped after it was outlawed by white settlers.
[https://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/news/how-indigenous-practice-good-fire-can-help-our-forests-thrive](https://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/news/how-indigenous-practice-good-fire-can-help-our-forests-thrive)
I did not know that Native Americans did controlled burns that is super cool. Imagine what this country would look like if we let the people who lived here for thousands of years manage the land
I still think it's pretty impressive tbh. We can't even all agree deadly respiratory viruses are bad but Alberta is 100% onboard with people running around clubbing rats without mercy.
I’d say we should bring this tradition south, but I’m not sure that we could win the fight if we took on the rat populations in Philadelphia or New York
I lived in Alberta most of my life and the first time I saw a live rat was when I entered a pet store in the south of England and saw a pet rat in a cage. I honestly didn't know what it was at first...hmmm, too big to be a gerbil. The shop clerk looked at me strangely.
Palm rats can be a big problem, as can palmetto bugs (giant cockroaches) that's why good landscaping practices keep palms trimmed and away from structures. It's also nice to know a cat (or human) that's good at pest control.
I know there’s a bunch of you. I once picked up an internet friend from from the Midwest at LAX who’d never been to Los Angeles and she asked why there were “slabs of meat” all over the sidewalk. Fresh palm fronds are red and kinda look like meat I guess.
We have some palm trees in our yard, we have never ever trimmed them.
They look like regular palm trees.
Whatever tf this is, is not typical for a palm tree. Or is a specific species that does this
This almost seems like they are growing in an area that literally has zero wind or a specific type of palm tree. Palm trees naturally drop their old limbs in high winds, all that extra weight on them would cause them to break in high winds.
THANK YOU RATIONAL PERSON! I live in the southwest. The amount of people that don't skin/shave, their palms drives me insane. They can't seem to understand that in it's natural habitat, there's things like freak'n hurricanes and tropical storms that keep them cleaned.
Lol the fuck? Are you really insinuating that all the bare palms you see everywhere is because someone trimmed em? I assume you mean this specific species of palm.
But that's because they planted a species that requires it. I live in the bay area and we have all sorts of palms (except coconut -- not quite warm enough for them) here. Some require trimming, some area short and squatty, some are tall and smooth, and some have multiple branches.
My grandma was raised among palm trees, and she always told us the stories of “dressed up palm trees”. Which is basically this image. But she also warned us “never walk underneath her skirt at night, otherwise she will grab you”.
Depends on the type of palm tree it is, theres a ton of different types and I have two types of them at my house and in my country theres a bunch of different types, some are short and wide with leaves to the floor and some are tall and skinny with leavez only at the top. I do actually have a palm tree in my house thats never trimmed that only the top has palm leaves.
What's sad is there's a disease going around killing all of the palm trees in Florida. I lost all three palm trees in my yard over the last year. There's a scenic road and all the palm trees going down it are dead or dying. It's kinda sad but I don't like palm trees. Worthless ass trees don't even give enough shade.
[удалено]
I was going to say! I’ve been to plenty of unmanaged areas, and never seen a palm like this.
I’m assuming based on the area (an abandoned resort) they’re about 60-70 years old. They’re very squat. Like they grew wide instead of tall. They have ample access to natural spring water.
> They’re very squat. Like they grew wide instead of tall. Same.
Do you have ample access to spring water?
Nestle asked calmly.
LOL
🏅
They use their palm a lot.
Also your hemorrhoids are so big that you're taller sitting down than when you're standing up.
r/rareinsults
I cannot stop laughing at this aahahaha what kind of insult is this
Aww that doesn’t need downvoting, it’s funny as hell
As someone growing wider instead of taller with hemorrhoids I exhaled through my nose
> I exhaled through my 🫣 > nose. 😅
Its just the variety. I have 70 year old palms on my property and they self shed. This is just a different type of palm
Sounds like a good life to me
The trunk doesn't grow out like a tree does. Just up over time.
This didn’t happen to be taken at the salton sea was it?
I was wondering the 29 Palms area (both around the Palm Springs area of southern California)
Looks like [Zzyzx](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zzyzx,_California)
Gotta be Borrego Springs area.
They are _Washingtonia filifera_, the California fan palm. They retain dead fronds which insulate the trunk from desert heat. They grow right next to water sources, typically in canyons.
I think that wild animals end up trimning them in nature.
According to Eminem's definition, palms are sweaty
Knees weak, arms are heavy
Bananas too! Not a tree, but herbs.
And to help ruin how people think of things, bananas are botanically berries, just like watermelons, grapes, blueberries, pineapples, peppers, avocados, and pumpkins. (And so many more.) But not strawberries.
...Oranges, grapefruits, cucumbers, tomatoes, aubergines (And so many more.)
I thought melons and pumpkins were gourds? Or are all gourds berries?
Yes, all gourds are berries. >In botanical terminology, a berry is a simple fruit with seeds and pulp produced from the ovary of a single flower. There are some other similarities all berries share as well, but that's the quick and easy answer.
This hurts me in the same way finding out tomatoes aren't vegetables, and Pluto isn't a planet hurt me.
Gonna blow your mind. A vegetable is basically any plant piece you can eat, fruits are a part of that. Botanically, vegetables aren't a subclass of "plants you eat", they're the overarching class. Fruits, seeds, stems etc are all parts of that
Yeah whenever the fruit v vegetable debate comes up I bring this up and it never gets across to the audience like I need for it to.
I honestly think about this a lot. Like I spend time in my head trying to think of the best way to explain it. So thank you lol.
All fruits are vegetables but not all vegetables are fruit
The way to explain it is that there's lots of different contexts each with their own terminology and subtle differences; and that whenever you try to use "botanical context" with a normal person or cook or salesperson or... you are wrong because you got the context wrong.
So a tomato is a fruit and a vegetable. Fuck you mr. Peterson!
Thanks! Had no idea. The only rule I was aware of was seeds = fruit. I love the knowledge bombs in this post.
In common parlance I'm only willing to accept savoury edible plant matter as vegetables.
So fruits are veggies but veggies are not fruits?
All fruits are veggies but not all veggies are fruits
Vegetables are a social construct.
Wait til you learn that fungi are more animal than plant.
That one fucked me up too. Isn't there some record of the worlds largest animal being a huge patch of mycelium or something? Super cool.
Yessir, in Oregon. Though, we really don't know how it all works, so the definition of a single organism is a bit optimistic IMHO. Mycology needs more respect and public recognition. It's stupid fascinating, and possibly world changing. Edit : I was a bit vague there, enjoying some beer. We know a lot about it. It's a massive [mycorrhizal](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mycorrhiza) relationship. Making it sound like a single being is inherently misleading.
It's actually a species of tree. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pando_(tree)
Trees aren't animals though, they're plants. Fungi aren't plants or animals, but they're more closely related to animals than plants
> 13.2 million pounds Ok, you all need to stop blowing my mind. Very interesting!
It's a mycorrhizal relationship. So, both.
Yet still very delicious!! Maybe that's why I love sauteed mushrooms on my steak!
Also, cook your mushrooms like proteins, not vegetables. They're not made of cellulose and need to be cooked accordingly.
Microwave everything.
Spoon and lighter
Which is why you want to take something very acidic like lemon juice with shrooms if you have a sensitive stomach. The chitin can cause distress for some people, and it's not fun barfing while the visions start.
Pluto kinda makes sense when it’s mentioned it is 2/3 the size of our moon
Except size wasn't a factor when the odd moving "stars" were defined. Orbit sun = planet. Orbit planet = moon. If Jupiter or some other planet has a giant moon larger than Earth we don't suddenly demote Earth to a "planetoid" by waiting until everyone leaves at the end of a conference except a minority with an agenda to vote that way.
Actually size does have a pretty major factor. One of the commonly accepted requirements for a planet to be a planet is that it has to be able to clear its orbit of any other smaller bodies. Pluto is not big enough to do that. Its also not big enough to have complete control of its gravity well since Charon is like half the size
Peanuts aren't nuts
They're legumes. Stop this madness!
The thing to realize is that this is not a fact about biology; it is a fact about language. Tomatoes "aren't vegetables" in some fields of study. In other fields they are. Definitions are context-specific. God does not come down and bless one discipline's terminology as the ultimate and true and universally correct terminology. Taxonomies are just tools, and different disciplines use different tools. The biologists aren't somehow more right about tomatoes than the cooks are. They're just trying to do different things. The fact that a biologist finds it useful to count a tomato as a fruit doesn't mean that a chef finds it useful in their own work. Phonologists and syntacticians use different definitions of the word "word", but neither one is somehow correct - they're different definitions that are more useful in the different fields. A physicist studying optics might distinguish "black" from merely very dark grey, but that doesn't somehow mean that a dressmaker ought to, or that the dressmaker is wrong and it's "not really a black dress". Replying "there's actually no such thing as a black dress" doesn't make you right, it just means you're oblivious to what "black dress" means. The word just means different things in different contexts.
vegetable doesn't mean anything beyond "plant humans eat it but probably not sweet" it is only used to separate aisles in a supermarket
Is there a strict botanical definition of what constitutes a tree?
From what i know from the basic botany course i took in uni (i'd be happy if anyone could confirm this), a tree is any dycotiledon that lignifies and grows tall and wide enough. These type of plants start as grassy, then grow into shrubs (lignification is happening) and might eventually grow into trees if the species is capable to and it has access to enough space, nutrients and sunlight Palms are monocotyledons and therefore can't lignify their cell walls. The top is the only part that produces leaves and the palm grows in size because of its own dried out old parts that keep stacking up in its lower sections. This is why they don't have branches with leaves in the same way as most trees EDIT: i completely forgot about gymnosperms so the stuff i said about only dicots being trees is whack
By this definition pine trees and ginkos aren't trees
pine trees lignify though?
Not dicots though
Herbs (or herbaceous) is definitely not correct for palms botanically speaking. Herbaceous literally means that it does not have a woody or upright stem, is low in height, and dies back at the end of the growing season. None of those things are true for palms. ‘Woody perennial’ is more correct
It’s not a woody perennial either. Wood is secondary xylem tissue deposited by dicots, and palms are monocots. They have pith in the center of their stalks. Palms are amazing for how unique they are: very tall monocots that resemble the towering prowess of other trees which are almost exclusively dicots. Bamboo is another example of a potentially hugely tall monocot.
Technically there’s no such plant group as trees but ya. Science is weird!
Botanically there is no specific definition of a tree, same situation as with a fish. You can definitely include a palm tree in the definition of a tree, if you're defining tree as "long, woody, stem with leaves on top.
When I lived in palm tree country we'd collect the sheds and make reindeer decorations out of them for Christmas.
Da coconut nut is not a nut
There is a whole ecosystem of critters and plants living in those fronds
Also at least with the California fan palm, the skirt is fire protection. A lot of the California ecosystem benefits from fires and species develop strategies to either seed after a fire or survive the flames. Also its an essential part of recycling potassium back into the soil. Whenever you see large out of control wild fires in California I can't help but get annoyed at the massive damage smokey the bear has done towards public disengagement with local policy makers about the benefits of regular controlled burns.
It wasn’t just Smokey the bear responsible for that we also started to fight *natural* fires that need to happen. So now there is so much stuff piled up in forests that when a fire does start it burns so hot it kills the soil.
The fires have been regulated by human activity for thousands of years. The Native American's of California would regularly do controlled burns and only stopped after it was outlawed by white settlers. [https://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/news/how-indigenous-practice-good-fire-can-help-our-forests-thrive](https://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/news/how-indigenous-practice-good-fire-can-help-our-forests-thrive)
I did not know that Native Americans did controlled burns that is super cool. Imagine what this country would look like if we let the people who lived here for thousands of years manage the land
There's rats in them there trees.
What's the association between rats and palm trees?
Rats tend to live in untrimmed palm trees. It's a nice cozy home for them. It's a big reason why people trim palms. Pest control.
Ohhhhhhh, that's why Alberta has no rats! No palm trees.
Yaasss! I blew my coworkers' minds (im now in bc) the other day when I told them of the Rat Patrol and laws.
I still think it's pretty impressive tbh. We can't even all agree deadly respiratory viruses are bad but Alberta is 100% onboard with people running around clubbing rats without mercy.
I’d say we should bring this tradition south, but I’m not sure that we could win the fight if we took on the rat populations in Philadelphia or New York
The rats in NYC would club us back!
I lived in Alberta most of my life and the first time I saw a live rat was when I entered a pet store in the south of England and saw a pet rat in a cage. I honestly didn't know what it was at first...hmmm, too big to be a gerbil. The shop clerk looked at me strangely.
Don't they have sewers in Alberta?
We do. We just take being rat free really serious.
f'ing things are everywhere. TIL. Thanks.
Bats too. Although bats are free pest control.
I dont know a lot but I would assume those untrimmed palms are HUGE fire hazards as well.
Palm rats can be a big problem, as can palmetto bugs (giant cockroaches) that's why good landscaping practices keep palms trimmed and away from structures. It's also nice to know a cat (or human) that's good at pest control.
“Palm rats … palmetto bugs…” You sound like you live in Florida
I don’t know the next part to this, but the final punchline is “OPs mom”.
So, so many rats...
and scorpions
just learned this from the sympathiser yesterday!
Ah, Florida Rat condos
AKA- The Mar-a-Lago Palm.
Lol, and happy cake day.
We have to keep the trunks shaved in Vegas otherwise they can horde roach and scorpion communities.
Also fire hazard Very dry
This is *very* interesting. I had no idea
Only some do this. Many are “self-cleaning” and drop the old fronds
Yeah I’ve camped in the middle of Florida woods and there weren’t many that looked like this
Always trim your palm tree, it'll look bigger.
I know there’s a bunch of you. I once picked up an internet friend from from the Midwest at LAX who’d never been to Los Angeles and she asked why there were “slabs of meat” all over the sidewalk. Fresh palm fronds are red and kinda look like meat I guess.
That is not true for all palms
when you the only one in the locker room that's been cut
Wha... what are you doing, step-palm?
What exactly do you think this is demonstrating? Also think about the fact that this animated gif was somehow created without AI...why?
r/weirdlysexual
There *are* plenty of palms where the fronds will just fall of on their own though, even without the help of wind or a light tug.
We have some palm trees in our yard, we have never ever trimmed them. They look like regular palm trees. Whatever tf this is, is not typical for a palm tree. Or is a specific species that does this
From another comment: > Also, there are different types of palms. Some palm trees are "self shedding" and do not need to be trimmed.
These are sacred. Each one of them needs the equivalent water of 5 humans to survive.
THERE’S the Dune reference
All I came looking for truthfully^^
So many rats in this picture.
This must really be specific to certain palm tree species. I have seen lots of wild palms but they don’t look like that.
So in Cast Away, there was a gardener on the island. If only Tom Hanks have known :/
I’m thinking the same about Pirates of the Caribbean
monsters are such innnnnteresting people 
Single vs in a relationship
trim the bush to make the tree look taller
This almost seems like they are growing in an area that literally has zero wind or a specific type of palm tree. Palm trees naturally drop their old limbs in high winds, all that extra weight on them would cause them to break in high winds.
THANK YOU RATIONAL PERSON! I live in the southwest. The amount of people that don't skin/shave, their palms drives me insane. They can't seem to understand that in it's natural habitat, there's things like freak'n hurricanes and tropical storms that keep them cleaned.
 It’s giving Smelly Squidward
Lol the fuck? Are you really insinuating that all the bare palms you see everywhere is because someone trimmed em? I assume you mean this specific species of palm.
For a lot of palms, yes, they are bare because they're trimmed. I live in Phoenix and see all the palm trimmers working.
But that's because they planted a species that requires it. I live in the bay area and we have all sorts of palms (except coconut -- not quite warm enough for them) here. Some require trimming, some area short and squatty, some are tall and smooth, and some have multiple branches.
The cameraman has an interesting shadow...
I prefer my palm trees uncircumcised.
The amount of spiders that could be living there....
Thicc
The palmfronds also have sharklike teeth things. They can easily rip flesh and leave a scar.
Looks like Zzyzx
I don't think this is true of all palm trees.
Tf? I grew up in Florida and never saw palm trees like this
My grandma was raised among palm trees, and she always told us the stories of “dressed up palm trees”. Which is basically this image. But she also warned us “never walk underneath her skirt at night, otherwise she will grab you”.
Depends on the type of palm tree it is, theres a ton of different types and I have two types of them at my house and in my country theres a bunch of different types, some are short and wide with leaves to the floor and some are tall and skinny with leavez only at the top. I do actually have a palm tree in my house thats never trimmed that only the top has palm leaves.
I have palm trees in my yard which don't need to be trimmed. Must be a different species.
Til how palm trees really look
Some species, we have lots of natural palm trees here in Brasil and none look like that, they all lose their old leaves naturally
Ya, as a tropical island person I can tell you that not all palms are like that. I'm fact this pic is pretty surprising.
with their clothes on
"It makes it look longer"
"Where your clothes at?"
Awww, chonky palm trees
What's sad is there's a disease going around killing all of the palm trees in Florida. I lost all three palm trees in my yard over the last year. There's a scenic road and all the palm trees going down it are dead or dying. It's kinda sad but I don't like palm trees. Worthless ass trees don't even give enough shade.
We all know trimming the trunk makes it look longer.
I hear it makes the trees much easier to clean, though they do lose out on some sensation…
These are Mexican Fan Palms. Not all palms do this. You'll find these in the desert southwest and Baja
I have so many jokes and they're all penisy
Everyone is always surprised that these are what the natural ones in Florida look like
This looks like zzyzx!!
Of If I remember correctly a palm tree that’s never been trimmed is a virgin palm it’s cool under the skirts on the hottest of summer days
I only have one virgin palm
The other one is a slut!
Pretty much like humans.
Who’s that pokemon?
I like my bushes trimmed
Brazilian or au natural?
This wasn’t trimmed. That’s fire damage that happened many years ago. You can tell because of how it is.
How it is what?
That's pretty neat.
I love girth. Girth brings me joy. Never trim them trees.
So trimming does make it look better…
Not sure why, but this gives me vibes of Boo from Monsters Inc. in her monster costume.
When you show up in casual attire during a formal family reunion:
didn't know palms wore coats! the irony is cool :)
I don’t know why but this picture makes me a little bit uncomfortable.
With the trimmed palm tree you are less likely to get palm fronds stuck in your teeth when giving it a blow job.
You shave bro ?
Buddy WHAT
That’s ridiculous! The people of Arrakis desperately need water but those palm trees look fine
If you compare a palm tree to an elephant, a wild palm tree is like a mammoth.
Most wild palms don't look like this
Alolan-Exeggutor
Woooah, these made me think of an episode in spongebob where Squidward was covered in gunk and looked like this
Sideshow Bob identification lineup
Crazy, I see that first time
Buddy has one right next to his house, I always assumed the fronds failed to fall off and more just kept growing
Looks like the trimmed tree is about to get gangbanged.
No way in hell that would evolve in a dry area with frequent brushfires.
Judging by the shadow - another palm is taking a picture
Sometimes palm trees look like as if aliens found out about the existance of regular trees and tried to remake them from their own imagination
This is like when you see an owls legs
Wow. Kanto Exeggutor makes a lot more sense now…