NationStates Jolt Archive

This is the weirdest thing I've ever come across on Google today.

"Nix v. Hedden

Botanically, a tomato is a fruit. However, in common parlance it is seen as a vegetable, hence the United States Supreme Court ruled that legally, a tomato is a vegetable"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nix_v._Hedden

So, what say you?

I'll go with the botanical evidence. Tomatoes are a fruit, no matter what people call them. Likewise, french fries are a vegetable.

Well, given that there was a time (at least in urban legend) when the US Government ruled that Pi was exactly 3... Fruit. Botany > Opinion.

Should Nix have won the case?

fruit.

Tomato's are vegetables.

You can call them a fruit all you want.

Doesn't really matter.

(Of course you'll say the same thing :) )

It's a fruit, but I can see why the court ruled it was a vegetable.

It's a marsupial.

It's a marsupial.
Only in New Zealand.

Only in New Zealand.
Wouldn't that make it a kiwi?

It is an enlarged ovary containing axile ovules. Fruit.

Wouldn't that make it a kiwi?
Only when it's green.

Only when it's green.
Kiwis are brown, have no tail, cannot fly, and come from New Zealand.




But which kiwi do I mean?????
Dum dum dum.....

Look, I have grown up around tomatoes, my father does genetic engeniring of tomatoes, they are a fruit. The reason "they" want them to be classifyed as a vegitable is so they can call ketsup a vegtiable product in school lunches, saving them time and money not having to provide real vegitables. I'm not kidding. Biologicaly, they are a fruit.

It's a myth. There's no such thing as a tomato.

Look, I have grown up around tomatoes, my father does genetic engeniring of tomatoes, they are a fruit. The reason "they" want them to be classifyed as a vegitable is so they can call ketsup a vegtiable product in school lunches, saving them time and money not having to provide real vegitables. I'm not kidding. Biologicaly, they are a fruit.
Do 'they' fly around in black unmarked helicopters and secretly rule the world from underground bunkers?
http://lonestartimes.com/images/tinfoil.jpg

If you read it, it doesn't say that the Supreme Court literally ruled tomatos a fruit. What they said was this act classified fruits and vegetables as people normally thought of them, not in their literal sense. As such, while they didn't specifically say tomatos were a vegetable, they did say that they were commonly thought of as a vegetable, and as such, were invision as qualifying under this act.

Do 'they' fly around in black unmarked helicopters and secretly rule the world from underground bunkers?

yes

but sometimes we refer to them as "republicans" for short.

Kiwis are brown, have no tail, cannot fly, and come from New Zealand.




But which kiwi do I mean?????
Dum dum dum.....
http://www.moviewavs.com/cgi-bin/tvwavs.cgi?X-Files=xfiles.wav

If you read it, it doesn't say that the Supreme Court literally ruled tomatos a fruit. What they said was this act classified fruits and vegetables as people normally thought of them, not in their literal sense. As such, while they didn't specifically say tomatos were a vegetable, they did say that they were commonly thought of as a vegetable, and as such, were invision as qualifying under this act.
No, they literally ruled it. They think they can just change the nature of things. The Supreme Court is (are?) not God!!

Personally, i think we should classify the as we all classified 'gooze'(solid+liquid=sliquid)
except relating to produce, it shall be known as a "Frutable" or a "Vruit"

Though it still is a fruit, no matter how hard you look at it.

No, they literally ruled it. They think they can just change the nature of things. The Supreme Court is (are?) not God!!
I think you'll find that the Sumpreme Court of Jesusland is God.

I think you'll find that the Sumpreme Court of Jesusland is God.
Where Nascar Dad is the president and all the women are pregnant?

Do 'they' fly around in black unmarked helicopters and secretly rule the world from underground bunkers?
Yes! Tomatoes are taking over the world! OMG NOEZ!!!!

the tomato is a fruit

Where Nascar Dad is the president and all the women are pregnant?

..where human life is held sacred..

...and nobody is lazy, sitting around on welfare, sapping the economy.

;)

This is the weirdest thing I've ever come across on Google today.

"Nix v. Hedden

Botanically, a tomato is a fruit. However, in common parlance it is seen as a vegetable, hence the United States Supreme Court ruled that legally, a tomato is a vegetable"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nix_v._Hedden

So, what say you?

Neither. Both the term "vegetable" and the term "fruit" are not properly defined. There is no universally accepted botanical definition; so it largely boils down to a matter of what the people call it - just as the supreme court apparantly stated.

No, they literally ruled it. They think they can just change the nature of things. The Supreme Court is (are?) not God!!

No. The job of the court is to interpret legislative acts (among other things) the court ruled, that a proper interpretation of the act would be to define "frut" and "vegetable" the way that society defines them, not in the way they are properly, biolgically defined. As such the court found that societ as a whole views tomatos as a vegetable, not a fruit. Therefore, the act itself was ment to include tomatos, thus it includes tomatos.

They did not say they were CHANGING the definition, only that the act was ment to be interpreted with a societal definition, not a biological one.

Neither. Both the term "vegetable" and the term "fruit" are not properly defined. There is no universally accepted botanical definition; so it largely boils down to a matter of what the people call it - just as the supreme court apparantly stated.
actually, fruit is very specific...
"The ripened ovary or ovaries of a seed-bearing plant, together with accessory parts, containing the seeds and occurring in a wide variety of forms."

if it an edible part of a plant that does not fit that description, it is a vegetable.

actually, fruit is very specific...
"The ripened ovary or ovaries of a seed-bearing plant, together with accessory parts, containing the seeds and occurring in a wide variety of forms."

if it an edible part of a plant that does not fit that description, it is a vegetable.

That makes a tomato a fruit.

That makes a tomato a fruit.

Unless you use a different definition of vegetable. Which many people do ;)

Unless you use a different definition of vegetable. Which many people do ;)
I can define vegetable as a species of monkey. That doesn't make it correct.

The more important question is, "What about watermelons?"

No. The job of the court is to interpret legislative acts (among other things) the court ruled, that a proper interpretation of the act would be to define "frut" and "vegetable" the way that society defines them, not in the way they are properly, biolgically defined. As such the court found that societ as a whole views tomatos as a vegetable, not a fruit. Therefore, the act itself was ment to include tomatos, thus it includes tomatos.

They did not say they were CHANGING the definition, only that the act was ment to be interpreted with a societal definition, not a biological one.
The Supreme Court is CRAZY with Power. There's your proof that I'm right!

Let's ask the tomato:

"What are you?"

http://www.studip.uni-goettingen.de/pictures/smile/tomato2.gif
I'm a berry!

See? Tomatoes are berries, and berries are fruit. :D

Besides, if the the tomato was to be considered a vegetable, you wouldn't wait for the red berries to develop - you'd be eating the green stuff as soon as the plants were big enough (which can be deadly because the tomato is a nightshade plant!).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tomato

Isn't it really showing that the Supreme Court should make such a ruling against scientific evidence? Next time those guys appear in public, someone should http://www.studip.uni-goettingen.de/pictures/smile/tomato.gif*

*(To be regarded as parody. Poster not reliable for charges filed!)

The Supreme Court’s rulings are the law of the land, therefore the tomato is a vegetable... Not that it really matters as the original ruling was really over the matter of tariffs (a tomato importer was trying to escape them). It is a legal anachronism that has not yet been overturned.

I indeed agree, it's a vegetable: it is eaten salted rather than sweetened.

The tomato is a fruit. but due to tariff laws at that time, the US Surpreme Court ruled the Tomato as a Vegetable. So it's proof that even the US Surpreme Court can be swayed by financial reasons as well as POPULAR and not SCIENTIFIC reasons. :D


(Veggies were taxed... fruit was not.)

I indeed agree, it's a vegetable: it is eaten salted rather than sweetened.
Pineapple and Papaya tend to be salted when eaten. but they're Fruits.

Let's ask the tomato:

"What are you?"

http://www.studip.uni-goettingen.de/pictures/smile/tomato2.gif
I'm a berry!

See? Tomatoes are berries, and berries are fruit. :D

=.=' .... you can talk to fruit.... and they talk back to you...

Never! They are eaten with sugar!!

*hides in a corner, refusing to admit the truth*

Actually the justification for their ruling was based around the science of the time…the terribly incorrect science. Were this issue ever to become relevant again (somehow) and be revisited by the Supreme Court it would not doubt overturn the pervious ruling and go with the classifications of modern biology.

Originally Posted by Sarkhaan
actually, fruit is very specific...
"The ripened ovary or ovaries of a seed-bearing plant, together with accessory parts, containing the seeds and occurring in a wide variety of forms."

if it an edible part of a plant that does not fit that description, it is a vegetable.

Tomatoes are herbs

And they arent animals or minerals so they are vegetables.

Tomatoes are above all evil.

http://www.tomatoesareevil.com/

I substitute your reality and replace it with my own. A Tomato is a animal and it has feelings too
:D

I substitute your reality and replace it with my own. A Tomato is a animal and it has feelings too
:D
:confused: I always thought a Tomato was a hot looking lady... you mean those construction guys were wrong???

Yes, but is NS' very own Cabra West a real lil tomato or what?

Hold IT!!! My Sister just informed me that we are all wrong.

the Red Tomato is neither Vegetable nor Fruit.

its acutally a 1973 Red Grand Torino driven by two street wise cops called Starsky and Hutch!

heh, did anyone read the link at the bottom of the wiki page where the European Union had decided to call a carrot a fruit.

Meh, the tomato is probably both a vegetable and a fruit. The definition of vegetable seems to encompass the definition of fruit, just like it encompasses tubers and nuts.

Technically you can class humans as fruit if you want. The dictionary says so, so it must be true.

I am so happy to be from a nation where fruits and vegetables have the same legal standing...

The real question is whether it is pronounced to-mae-to or to-mah-to. I personally fall on the "mae" side of things.

I am so happy to be from a nation where fruits and vegetables have the same legal standing...

The real question is whether it is pronounced to-mae-to or to-mah-to. I personally fall on the "mae" side of things.

Mae FTW.

The Supreme Court got involved in this? They must be real bored. (Does this affect my score on www.realage.com? I like tomatoes but I don't eat a lot of vegetables.)

Mae FTW.Where the hell are you getting the 'e' from? It's to-ma-toe, to sounding like the to in top, ma sounding like how a baby says mama, and toe sounding those things on the end your feet. There is no e, i or y to change the 'mah' sound into a 'may' sound.

Yes, but is NS' very own Cabra West a real lil tomato or what?

Is she? Got a pic?

The Supreme Court got involved in this? They must be real bored. (Does this affect my score on www.realage.com? I like tomatoes but I don't eat a lot of vegetables.)Read the wiki article much? The ruling was made in the 1890s.

Where the hell are you getting the 'e' from? It's to-ma-toe, to sounding like the to in top, ma sounding like how a baby says mama, and toe sounding those things on the end your feet. There is no e, i or y to change the 'mah' sound into a 'may' sound.

Sorry, it's a British vs American thing. If I said "to-mah-toe" around here, I'd get beat up. :rolleyes:

Read the wiki article much? The ruling was made in the 1890s.

Why would I bother reading a wiki article about tomatoes? Geeze!

Where the hell are you getting the 'e' from? It's to-ma-toe, to sounding like the to in top, ma sounding like how a baby says mama, and toe sounding those things on the end your feet. There is no e, i or y to change the 'mah' sound into a 'may' sound.

Not totally sure. Instead, we read.

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/tomato

Ooooh...Paradeiser. That's what I'll call them from now on.

Why would I bother reading a wiki article about tomatoes? Geeze!Because you have nothing better to do? That much is obvious since you're posting in General.

Not totally sure. Instead, we read.

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/tomato

Ooooh...Paradeiser. That's what I'll call them from now on.I think there is something to be said for the fact that the UK pronunciation guide uses an 'a' or an 'A' to represent the vowel sound that is made, as opposed to the US pronunciation using an 'e'.

Does this mean if you went to the Canadian/US or Mexican/US borders and through tomatoes back and forth they'd change from fruit to vegetable as they went over (sounds like a way to make money in bets:D )

Here's how I see the whole veggie/fruit thing: if it's primarily used in deserts, its a fruit, else = vegetable. I've never had tomato cake or ice-cream, so it's a vegetable. I don't care what science says. Most people who talk about tomatos aren't botanists, they're normal people. And normal people need normal, sensible ways of doing things.

Here's how I see the whole veggie/fruit thing: if it's primarily used in deserts, its a fruit, else = vegetable. I've never had tomato cake or ice-cream, so it's a vegetable. I don't care what science says. Most people who talk about tomatos aren't botanists, they're normal people. And normal people need normal, sensible ways of doing things.S you agree with the European Union that carrots are cakes?

You do get tomatoe juice though, just like you get carrot juice, apple juice, orange juice, pineapple juic, etc.

S you agree with the European Union that carrots are cakes?

You do get tomatoe juice though, just like you get carrot juice, apple juice, orange juice, pineapple juic, etc.

... i'm not sure I ever heard the EU say that carrots where cakes. But carrot cake is an example of the rule in action: although carrot cake does exist, it is not the primary way in which carrots are prepared. They are far more often found in savoury non-cake context, and therefore count as vegetable. And juice is irrelevent.

It's a vegetable. All other fruits grow on trees. Do tomatoes grow on trees? Nope.

This is the weirdest thing I've ever come across on Google today.

"Nix v. Hedden

Botanically, a tomato is a fruit. However, in common parlance it is seen as a vegetable, hence the United States Supreme Court ruled that legally, a tomato is a vegetable"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nix_v._Hedden

So, what say you?

well it is in every way a fruit except in common parlance so it is a fruit. that people who engage in common parlance think it is a vegetable does not make it a vegetable, it just means that common parlance is stupid :P

It's a vegetable. All other fruits grow on trees. Do tomatoes grow on trees? Nope.

...What? Let's start with strawberry bushes...

...grapevines...

...watermelon vine-like herbs...

...banana herbs often confused as trees...

...pineapple...things...

... i'm not sure I ever heard the EU say that carrots where cakes. But carrot cake is an example of the rule in action: although carrot cake does exist, it is not the primary way in which carrots are prepared. They are far more often found in savoury non-cake context, and therefore count as vegetable. And juice is irrelevent.Whoops, brain fart. I meant to say fruit instead of cake. They do this because Portugal makes carrot Jam.

And juices do count. Tomatoe juice and Carrot juice are very common. When was the last time your supermarket stocked broccoli juice?

And juices do count. Tomatoe juice and Carrot juice are very common. When was the last time your supermarket stocked broccoli juice?

Its my rule, I can say what does and doesn't count ;)

...What? Let's start with strawberry bushes...

grapevines...Pineapples and melons too.

I think it would be the first time I'd feel sympathy for a plant if I saw a melon tree. Especially if they were watermelons. And doubt that the monkeys that came down from the trees would have survived for long if they'd been in a melon tree area.

Pineapples and melons too.

Yeah, went through a list of fruits to find common non-tree ones.

Its my rule, I can say what does and doesn't count ;)Well my rule says it does count. So :p

Besides you didn't comment on the Portugese carrot jam.

Yeah, went through a list of fruits to find common non-tree ones.You hadn't edited those in yet when I quoted your post. Meh. :p

Well my rule says it does count. So :p

Besides you didn't comment on the Portugese carrot jam.

...so your rule says that not only are tomatoes fruit, carrots are too? just cos of some disgusting juice and some weirdo Portugese concoction? :p

People are getting really worked up over this. No, the Supreme court are not redefining what a tomato is and going against botanists. They are interpreting a law about taxing vegetables and have decided that tomatoes fall under this law. This doesn't mean they're saying that tomatoes are vegetables, just that they are subject to this particular law.

Oh, and it's to-mah-toe.

Oh, and it's to-mah-toe.

Paradeiser

Pah-rah-die-zer :p

People are getting really worked up over this. No, the Supreme court are not redefining what a tomato is and going against botanists. They are interpreting a law about taxing vegetables and have decided that tomatoes fall under this law. This doesn't mean they're saying that tomatoes are vegetables, just that they are subject to this particular law.

Oh, and it's to-mah-toe.

All the supreme court said was that the LAW in question was created to define vegetables the way the COMMON SOCIETY defined vegetables. The COMMON SOCIETY defined tomatoes (wrongly) as a vegetable. Thus the law, which applied to anything COMMONLY THOUGHT of as a vegable included tomatoes which were...commonly thought of as vegtables. The court's job is to determine the intent of the legislation, they determined, quite possibly correctly, that when drafting a tarrif law that effected vegetables the legislation was intending it to cover tomatoes.

Thus they said, it covers tomatoes. They didn't redefine ANYTHING, all they said was, this law was made with the common societal definitions in mind, NOT the technical biological ones, and since common societal definitions was tomato = vegetable, then for the purpose of this law tomato = vegetable. Really now, the idea that omg the supreme court is mad with power is just silly. They were doing their job, trying to figure out the proper way to interpret a legislative act, and they decided that it was appropriate to interpret it as far as society would interpret it, not as botanists with specific knowledge would.

I'd also point out that this was over 100 years ago, and it's of good certainty that everyone involved in this is long since dead.

As someone said above, they're both.

Fruit are a subsection of vegetables. My current understanding is the things with seeds (even very big ones) are fruit, the rest are vegetable.

And it's to-mah-toe.

"Tomato: Fruit or Vegetable?"

Neither. It's a berry. :p

...so your rule says that not only are tomatoes fruit, carrots are too? just cos of some disgusting juice and some weirdo Portugese concoction? :pMy rule says if it wants to be a fruit then let it be fruit. Stop oppressing the plants, man.

Botanically, tomato is a fruit.
Legally, tomato is a vegetable.
Nutritionally, tomato is a berry.

This is the weirdest thing I've ever come across on Google today.

"Nix v. Hedden

Botanically, a tomato is a fruit. However, in common parlance it is seen as a vegetable, hence the United States Supreme Court ruled that legally, a tomato is a vegetable"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nix_v._Hedden

So, what say you?
First I am embarrassed that this made it to the Supreme Court, wholly and completely embarrassed.

You will also note that hard science aside the Supreme Court ruled to have tomatos be the subject of a tariff versus not, so that imported tomatoes would receive a tariff they otherwise would not being a fruit.

The Supreme Court could rule the moon is made of cheese that would not make it so.

A tomato is a fruit, scientifically speaking--so it is a damned fruit.

Paradeiser

Pah-rah-die-zer :p
I like that. I'm gonna use that instead.

In 1981 President Ronald Reagan's budget director, David Stockman proposed classifying ketchup as a vegetable as part of Reagan's budget cuts for federally financed school lunch programs (it would make it cheaper to satisfy the requirements on vegetable content of lunches).
The suggestion was widely ridiculed and the proposal was killed.

I like that. I'm gonna use that instead.

Indeed. And while I'm exposing you to new words for things. Use the word "infinigon" for "circle".

This is the weirdest thing I've ever come across on Google today.

"Nix v. Hedden

Botanically, a tomato is a fruit. However, in common parlance it is seen as a vegetable, hence the United States Supreme Court ruled that legally, a tomato is a vegetable"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nix_v._Hedden

So, what say you?

If it's botanically a fruit, then it is a fruit, damnit! :p
I don't care if people thing it's a vegetable; they're techincally wrong.

"Tomato: Fruit or Vegetable?"

Neither. It's a berry. :p
aaaaand a berry is? Yes...a fruit.

hasn't anyone else noted that this case is over 100 years old?

This poll is stupid. Biologically they're a fruit. Legally (and also in cooking) they're a vegetable. Words have more than one definition.

Only when it's green.
I like traffic lights, no matter where they've been.

He likes traffic lights, no matter where they've been.

Pineapple and Papaya tend to be salted when eaten. but they're Fruits.


ewwwwwwwwww!

Thats just a wrong thing to do!

My taste buds have just involuntarily retracted into my tongue

Oh, btw ....

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/crazy/1302.gif

Tomatoes are bloodthirsty murderers.


http://img111.imageshack.us/img111/1732/killertomato6pi.png (http://imageshack.us)

I substitute your reality and replace it with my own. A Tomato is a animal and it has feelings too
:D

Sometimes late at night I hear the tomatoes chatting to one another about how rudely theyve been treated and how their feelings have been hurt by mean rutabagas and carrots oppressing them and denying them the rights they deserve.

I indeed agree, it's a vegetable: it is eaten salted rather than sweetened.That's rediculous. My brothers always ate them sweetened.
(I don't like 'm at all)

Where the hell are you getting the 'e' from? It's to-ma-toe, to sounding like the to in top, ma sounding like how a baby says mama, and toe sounding those things on the end your feet. There is no e, i or y to change the 'mah' sound into a 'may' sound.So you also pronounce 'mate' as [maht] ?

hasn't anyone else noted that this case is over 100 years old?Several people have, in fact..

So you also pronounce 'mate' as [maht] ?

Several people have, in fact..Damn... I can come up with several poor excuses. 1) I don't use the word mate when speaking. 2) E's can do weird shit to words. And since there is no other vowel between the a and the e in mate it is therefore a good example of E's screwing with words.

Kinda like how the vowel sound changes in words such as like, take, Rome, made

Right, brain beginning to work now. Your example is completely different as the 'ma' in to-ma-toe is in a different syllable to the e. Whereas mate is monosyllabic, therefore the e effects the vowel sound of the a.

Right, brain beginning to work now. Your example is completely different as the 'ma' in to-ma-toe is in a different syllable to the e. Whereas mate is monosyllabic, therefore the e effects the vowel sound of the a.Ok, how about matriarch, it's not monosyllabic, no 'e' affecting it, and the 'a' is still 'ay'.
Just accept it, English is weird. :p

Tomatoes have the seeds on the inside and is by definiton a fruit.
I think if there ever was a garden of eden a tomato not an apple was the forbidden fruit!!!

I think the US would pass a law that chalk and cheese are the same if it would benefit them and/or make life easier.

I can't believe a Supreme Court found this worth their time. Incredible waste of tax payers money. Were they bored?

The tomato is a berry. Berries are the fruit of a plants 'loins'. Or life giving fruit. They contain the seeds of the plant that aid in its procreation. Using something as a vegetable or perceiving it as such does not make it so.

This is absolutely pathetic. Lol. As if they didn't have more important things to worry about.

I suppose they also passed a law to say Jaffa Cakes are biscuits too, and not cakes. It's a cake before anyone decides to argue. Biscuits go soft and cakes go hard when left out in the open to go bad.

Ok, how about matriarch, it's not monosyllabic, no 'e' affecting it, and the 'a' is still 'ay'.
Just accept it, English is weird. :pNeevar! I will never give up my right to misprounce words as I see fit.

Matriarch? Is that the most common word you could come up with to refute my example? It's hardly a word I use everyday. Matriarch has a latin root, therefore it sucks. Germanic words ftw!

FRUIT! and it tastes a lot better than mushy peas too! :D

I think the US would pass a law that chalk and cheese are the same if it would benefit them and/or make life easier.

I can't believe a Supreme Court found this worth their time. Incredible waste of tax payers money. Were they bored?

The tomato is a berry. Berries are the fruit of a plants 'loins'. Or life giving fruit. They contain the seeds of the plant that aid in its procreation. Using something as a vegetable does not make it so.

This is absolutely pathetic. Lol. As if they didn't have more important things to worry about.If you read the article you would have realised it really was an incredible waste of taxpayers time as it meant they had to pay more taxes.

If you read the article you would have realised it really was an incredible waste of taxpayers time as it meant they had to pay more taxes.

I find it hard to believe that the thing that annoys taxpayes about paying tax is the amount of time it costs them...

If you read the article you would have realised it really was an incredible waste of taxpayers time as it meant they had to pay more taxes.

I didn't want to waste any more time on it than I felt necessary. And not reading the article was meant to add further insult. Aside from the fact the result was so predictable.

What about squashs, marrows and courgettes (zucchini). As far as I'm aware most people treat these things as vegetables and not fruit, despite them having a shit load of seeds in them.

I find it hard to believe that the thing that annoys taxpayes about paying tax is the amount of time it costs them...Right. I obviously haven't woken up yet. I'm going back to bed.

marrow squash

n : any of various squash plants grown for their elongated fruit with smooth dark green skin and whitish flesh

zucchini

n 1: marrow squash plant whose fruit are eaten when small [syn: courgette] 2: small cucumber-shaped vegetable marrow; typically dark green [syn: courgette]


FRUIT!

We harvest the fruit of the plant. Vegetables are plants that have edible components or are wholly edible. Components other than those described as fruit: eg. leaves, roots.

Matriarch? Is that the most common word you could come up with to refute my example?It's the first one that came to mind. I started with [mate] and went from there, so tagging something on the end is easiest.

It's hardly a word I use everyday. Matriarch has a latin root, therefore it sucks. Germanic words ftw!Well, tomato is hardly germanic either. Etymologically it comes from Nahuatl via Spanish.

I think the US would pass a law that chalk and cheese are the same if it would benefit them and/or make life easier.

I can't believe a Supreme Court found this worth their time. Incredible waste of tax payers money. Were they bored?

The tomato is a berry. Berries are the fruit of a plants 'loins'. Or life giving fruit. They contain the seeds of the plant that aid in its procreation. Using something as a vegetable or perceiving it as such does not make it so.

This is absolutely pathetic. Lol. As if they didn't have more important things to worry about.

I suppose they also passed a law to say Jaffa Cakes are biscuits too, and not cakes. It's a cake before anyone decides to argue. Biscuits go soft and cakes go hard when left out in the open to go bad.

Im guessing here by the jaffa cakes and biscuit beliefs which you hold that you are British and dont have the slightest inkling of how a case manages to find itself in front of the supreme court do you?

It's the first one that came to mind. I started with [mate] and went from there, so tagging something on the end is easiest.

Well, tomato is hardly germanic either. Etymologically it comes from Nahuatl via Spanish.

Among the greatest contributions to world civilization made by the early inhabitants of the Americas are plant foods such as the potato and squash. The tomato, whose name comes ultimately from the Nahuatl language spoken by the Aztecs and other groups in Mexico and Central America, was another important contribution. When the Spanish conquered this area, they brought the tomato back to Spain and, borrowing the Nahuatl word tomatl for it, named it tomate, a form shared in French, Portuguese, and early Modern English. Tomate, first recorded in 1604, gave way to tomato, a form created in English either because it was assumed to be Spanish or under the influence of the word potato. As is well known, people at first resisted eating this New World food because its membership in the nightshade family made it seem potentially poisonous, but it is now is an important element of many world cuisines.

Im guessing here by the jaffa cakes and biscuit beliefs which you hold that you are British and dont have the slightest inkling of how a case manages to find itself in front of the supreme court do you?

It was meant to be sarcastic and condescending, not an interesting insight.

Those words are in the dictionary too.

That was another example by the way. And that. And that...

Does it really matter? No.

Right, brain beginning to work now. Your example is completely different as the 'ma' in to-ma-toe is in a different syllable to the e. Whereas mate is monosyllabic, therefore the e effects the vowel sound of the a.

Um... if this is your brain beginning to work how come you think there is an E in tomato? Are you Dan Quayle?

It was meant to be sarcastic and condescending, not an interesting insight.

Those words are in the dictionary too.

That was another example by the way. And that. And that...

Does it really matter? No.

What does really natter....er...matter then gogrous ass?

Um... if this is your brain beginning to work how come you think there is an E in tomato? Are you Dan Quayle?No, he says the e in mate makes the a an 'ay', but in tomato there's no such e so the a is an 'ah'
:p

No, he says the e in mate makes the a an 'ay', but in tomato there's no such e so the a is an 'ah'
:pYes... that's it... it was a phonetic spelling... and there's no post on page 5 where I actually spell the word with an 'e'. None whatsoever. It was late at night and I was tired... Tomatoe and Potatoe are archaic spellings. I can be archaic if I want.

It's a fruit but it's hated by all the other fruits, so they sent him over to the vegetables where he tries to be cool but fails miserabely. It's a fruit, so what, we all eat it like a vegetable anyways...

Tomato is a fruit

Biological Fact

Tomato is a vegetable

According to the US Supreme Court

Tomato is a fruit

Biological Fact

Tomato is a vegetable

According to the US Supreme Court
The US Supreme Court has gone rogue.

The US Supreme Court has gone rogue.

SCOTUS exists to give us legal fictions, right?

Let's call the whole thing off

The tomato is a fruit, regardless of whatever idiotic ruling the U.S. Supreme Court came to.

It's a fruit that's (mostly) used as a vegetable.

The old tomato is infact a fruit despite what any stupid american court wants to say. It has seeds in it hence it is a fruit. Vegitables to not contain seeds whereas fruit do. I rest my case.

It was meant to be sarcastic and condescending, not an interesting insight.

Those words are in the dictionary too.

That was another example by the way. And that. And that...

Does it really matter? No.
don't you insult the British. We have a better judicial system than you anyhow. At least we dress propally for it and do it in style and do it correctly. Not let terrorists live. Come on the Brits and our High Courts. By the way I asume you are American due to your ignorance.

don't you insult the British. We have a better judicial system than you anyhow. At least we dress propally for it and do it in style and do it correctly. Not let terrorists live. Come on the Brits and our High Courts. By the way I asume you are American due to your ignorance.

Not....let...terroists...live...in....britain?

The country with a solid and staunch no death penalty policy?

Pineapple and Papaya tend to be salted when eaten. but they're Fruits.
OK, I thought defining the humble tomato as a vegetable was silly but eating pineapple with salt? What kind of a nut are you?

Not a peanut, obviously. That's a legume. :p

The Gorgeous Ass (who should be done for false advertising, frankly) speaks true concerning Jaffa cakes - they go hard, ergo cake.

The Gorgeous Ass (who should be done for false advertising, frankly)

Wha? How do you know it's false? Do you have info we don't?

SCOTUS exists to give us legal fictions, right?
Who sent you?

Ugh...If it contains seeds its a fruit.

Ugh...If it contains seeds its a fruit.
Right. Which is why a strawberry is a vegetable. It's not that hard people.

Ugh...If it contains seeds its a fruit.I never realised grains and pulses were fruits.

That definition is so broad that that is becomes useless in any field other than botany. It includes everything from apples, to tomatoes, to rice, to peas, to potatoes, to lentils, to even cotton.

By your definition, is a seedless grape a fruit?

And what Desperate Measures said. A strawberry doesn't contain its seeds.

I never realised grains and pulses were fruits.

That definition is so broad that that is comes useless in any field other than botany. It includes everything from apples, to tomatoes, to rice, to peas, to potatoes, to lentils.

By your definition, is a seedless grape a fruit?

A "fruit" is any fleshy material covering a seed or seeds. A seedless grape is engineered not to have seeds.

In 1893, the United States Supreme Court ruled the tomato was a "vegetable" and therefore subject to import taxes. The suit was brought by a consortium of growers who wanted it declared a vegetable to protect U.S. crop development and prices. Fruits, at that time, were not subjected to import taxes and foreign countries could flood the market with lower priced produce. (A hundred years really hasn't changed anything.)

And that is why you call some of your fruits vegetables.

As for your strawberries, do some fucking research:

The answer here seems to be that a strawberry is not really a berry, and may not be a fruit, depending on whom you ask. (Then again, lots of things you don't think of as berries really are, for example your many-seeded berries such as cucumbers, bananas, and watermelon. These are called "pepos," at least by botanists.) The strawberry is the enlarged end of the plant stamen, although it is sometimes classified as an aggregate fruit (a fruit that develops from several ovaries of a single flower).

Unlike most berries, the strawberry plant has seeds on the skin rather than skin around the seed. Perhaps this can be accounted for by the fact that strawberries do not normally reproduce by seeds. When the fruit is developing, the plant sends out slender growths called runners, also called clones, that look like strings. They grow on the ground and send out roots in the soil. The roots produce new plants which grow and bear fruit.

I never realised grains and pulses were fruits.

That definition is so broad that that is becomes useless in any field other than botany. It includes everything from apples, to tomatoes, to rice, to peas, to potatoes, to lentils.

By your definition, is a seedless grape a fruit?

And what Desperate Measures said. A strawberry doesn't contain its seeds.
I read somewhere that the seeds are the fruit and the strawberry itself is a vegetable. But: What would the Supreme Court say about this?

A "fruit" is any fleshy material covering a seed or seeds. A seedless grape is engineered not to have seeds.

In 1893, the United States Supreme Court ruled the tomato was a "vegetable" and therefore subject to import taxes. The suit was brought by a consortium of growers who wanted it declared a vegetable to protect U.S. crop development and prices. Fruits, at that time, were not subjected to import taxes and foreign countries could flood the market with lower priced produce. (A hundred years really hasn't changed anything.)

And that is why you call some of your fruits vegetables.Now try using the fourth person and stop sounding so accusative. If I asked someone what was your favourite fruit juice, no one would reply peanut juice. No one.

The botanical definition of fruit is completely useless to most people. If I asked someone to buy me some fruit so I could make a fruit salad I would not expect them to go out any buy me some lentils, rice, potatoes, barley and peanuts.

I read somewhere that the seeds are the fruit and the strawberry itself is a vegetable. But: What would the Supreme Court say about this?They'd call it a vegetable and tax it just to make sure.

They'd call it a vegetable and tax it just to make sure.
They just want their moneys. Damn you, SCOTUS.

Now try using the fourth person and stop sounding so accusative. If I asked someone what was your favourite fruit juice, no one would reply peanut juice. No one.

The botanical definition of fruit is completely useless to most people. If I asked someone to buy me some fruit so I could make a fruit salad I would not expect them to go out any buy me some lentils, rice, potatoes, barley and peanuts.

Who cares? The botanical definition of a fruit is the definition of a fruit. If you want to be confused about whether the tomato is a fruit or not, feel free. Me? I'll accept the definition of a fruit. Im not going to be caught off-guard with stupid responses like "seedless grapes" or strawberries.

Why do people still care about this? For one the case was 100 years ago, for another it's already been made clear the SCOTUS did not botanically redefine tomatoes.

by the way, strawberries do have seeds-you know the little black bits
A tomato is a FRUIT GODDAMMIT because it has seeds-you know the squshy seedy bit inside the fruit.Yes britain is a better country than america, but is not that much better and still exploits peiople as america doers throught he imf wto and trheir multinationals.And yes swansea is a nice place but not as nice as cardiff(wales rocks)

by the way, strawberries do have seeds-you know the little black bits
A tomato is a FRUIT GODDAMMIT because it has seeds-you know the squshy seedy bit inside the fruit.Yes britain is a better country than america, but is not that much better and still exploits peiople as america doers throught he imf wto and trheir multinationals.And yes swansea is a nice place but not as nice as cardiff(wales rocks)
The little black bits are outside the flesh. And I care because it makes me cry when I see an injustice done in my country.

Who cares? The botanical definition of a fruit is the definition of a fruit. If you want to be confused about whether the tomato is a fruit or not, feel free. Me? I'll accept the definition of a fruit. Im not going to be caught off-guard with stupid responses like "seedless grapes" or strawberries.So is a strawberry a fruit or not? In your post you seem to suggest that it is fruit and that it is also not a fruit. And the last definition of fruit you provided would define a seedless grape as a vegetable as it does not contain seeds. 'The' definition? The english language is pretty diverse, and the vast majority of words have multiple definitions rather just a single definition.

Language is also one of the few areas where majority rules. That is the nature of language.

If the majority says a tomato is not a fruit, the the tomato is not a fruit. And the minority defintion of fruit that says a tomato is a fruit is exactly that - a minority definition and comes second in priority the majority's definition of the word fruit.

Botanically, tomato is a fruit.
Legally, tomato is a vegetable.
Nutritionally, tomato is a berry.


There you are wrong, all of you. A tomato is a HIBRID!!! A HIBRID between a fruit and a vegtable. But it has seeds, so it kinda leens towards the fruit side...

By the way, what is with all the violent smiles?!?:gundge: :upyours: :headbang: :sniper: :mp5: and uh...:fluffle: ?!? Fluffle?!?


Photore

-I AM Life, the Universe, and Everything

So is a strawberry a fruit or not? In your post you seem to suggest that it is fruit and that it is also not a fruit. And the last definition of fruit you provided would define a seedless grape as a vegetable as it does not contain seeds. 'The' definition? The english language is pretty diverse, and the vast majority of words have multiple definitions rather just a single definition.

In the case of a strawberry, the fruit are the tiny tan achenes, each of which houses a single seed. The sweet, red, fleshy part is the receptacle, that portion of the pedicel (stalk) which held the parts of the flower—petals, stamens, and the many carpels which develop into the achenes.

The strawberry itself, the part that you eat, is the enlarged end of the plant stamen. If you read what i wrote before you would see I already said that.

If the majority says a tomato is not a fruit, the the tomato is not a fruit. And the minority defintion of fruit that says a tomato is a fruit is exactly that - a minority definition and comes second in priority the majority's definition of the word fruit.

So if a majority says 2+2=5, thats correct? The majority used to think the sun revolved around the earth and, holy shit, were they wrong or what?

EDIT: For those of you who dont know what achenes are (since obviously we have a simpleton crowd who cant do their own research), achenes are dry fruits that contain 1 seed. A sunflower seed is an example.

And I care because it makes me cry when I see an injustice done in my country.
F
I
E
N
D

:cool:

In the case of a strawberry, the fruit are the tiny tan achenes, each of which houses a single seed. The sweet, red, fleshy part is the receptacle, that portion of the pedicel (stalk) which held the parts of the flower—petals, stamens, and the many carpels which develop into the achenes.

The strawberry itself, the part that you eat, is the enlarged end of the plant stamen. If you read what i wrote before you would see I already said that.I did read it. But I found it irrelevant as you are simply talking about the botanical definition of fruit. I don't disagree with this definition, but the majority of the population are not botanists and have a more narrow definition of the word fruit. I am arguing that this definition is more important, and therefore when asking whether a tomato is a fruit or not (without any qualifying terms), then it is a vegetable, unless you add a qualifying term. Such as: 'In terms of botany, is a tomato a fruit or not?'. In which case a tomato is a fruit.

However...The answer here seems to be that a strawberry is not really a berry, and may not be a fruit ... The roots produce new plants which grow and bear fruit.Make your mind up. ;)

So if a majority says 2+2=5, thats correct? The majority used to think the sun revolved around the earth and, holy shit, were they wrong or what?Not really, no, seeing as 2+2=5 is a mathematical definition and not a linguistical one. However, mathematics is only a model. So if humanity decided to redefine the model, then it could. Whether the model would still be effective for modeling the universe is another question.

The Sun DOES orbit around the Earth. The Earth exerts a gravitational pull upon the Sun, and as such the Sun, to a certain extent, is orbiting around the Earth. However, defining the Earth as the centre of the solar system makes the modeling of the orbits of the planets, comets and asteroids much harder than if the Sun were defined as the centre of the solar system. This is because the Sun has the largest gravitational field of all the bodies in the solar system.

Don't use science in an argument about language. It doesn't work.
EDIT: For those of you who dont know what achenes are (since obviously we have a simpleton crowd who cant do their own research), achenes are dry fruits that contain 1 seed. A sunflower seed is an example.Personal attacks are a no-no. Take a deep breath and relax. I'm not trying to attack you personally with my posts.

Botanically, tomato is a fruit.
Legally, tomato is a vegetable.
Nutritionally, tomato is a berry.
See, this very clearly classifies the tomato as a special, blessed entity that God put on this earth solely to confound the evolutionary botanists.
It's on the shelf with the platypus (ornithorhynchus anatinus) and the yeti crab (kiwa hirsuta).
Blessed be, RAmen.

The little black bits are outside the flesh. And I care because it makes me cry when I see an injustice done in my country.
Em, the case was over a century ago, what do you do when there are more modern injustices?

Em, the case was over a century ago, what do you do when there are more modern injustices?
Blame teh libruhls, of course.
Anything new is their fault. Obviously, for a century-old issue to still be a concern for DM, he's looking at it from a conservative viewpoint.

Em, the case was over a century ago, what do you do when there are more modern injustices?
I like to start at the beginning. I'm up to 1893.

I did read it. But I found it irrelevant as you are simply talking about the botanical definition of fruit. I don't disagree with this definition, but the majority of the population are not botanists and have a more narrow definition of the word fruit. I am arguing that this definition is more important, and therefore when asking whether a tomato is a fruit or not (without any qualifying terms), then it is a vegetable, unless you add a qualifying term. Such as: 'In terms of botany, is a tomato a fruit or not?'. In which case a tomato is a fruit.

the fact is that a tomato is a fruit. Regardless of qualifiers. It is a fruit.


although, this whole debate is really really pointless (moreso than NS usually is) as vegetable is not an exclusive term as fruit is. Fruit is very clearly defined, but being a vegetable does not rule out also being a fruit (look at zuchinni and squash and the like). However, it IS most accurate, and most correct, to say that a tomato is a fruit.

Another example is the Red Panda. For a while, it was considered to be of the same family as raccoons. New genetic evidence shows that may actually be a part of the bear family. Neither is technically incorrect, but it is more correct to say that it is part of the bear family

I indeed agree, it's a vegetable: it is eaten salted rather than sweetened.

Patently false. Ketchup contains high levels of sugar. Good chili needs to have honey added to give it depth of flavour. Tomatoes are fruit. They are eaten like fruit. They are botanically fruit. They are fruit.

I like to start at the beginning. I'm up to 1893.

1893 was a great year for terrible court rulings.

Check out Riggs v. Palmer.

the fact is that a tomato is a fruit. Regardless of qualifiers. It is a fruit.


although, this whole debate is really really pointless (moreso than NS usually is) as vegetable is not an exclusive term as fruit is. Fruit is very clearly defined, but being a vegetable does not rule out also being a fruit (look at zuchinni and squash and the like). However, it IS most accurate, and most correct, to say that a tomato is a fruit.

Another example is the Red Panda. For a while, it was considered to be of the same family as raccoons. New genetic evidence shows that may actually be a part of the bear family. Neither is technically incorrect, but it is more correct to say that it is part of the bear family*sigh* I am not attacking the definition from a scientific perspective, therefore scientific arguments don't hold any water.

Meh, I've overloaded on meaningful debates. I can't be bothered with meaningful anymore, at least not for a couple more weeks.

Qualifiers are very important. If I asked you whether a tomato was a fruit according to the SCOTUS ruling on Nix vs. Hedden then it would be wrong to answer that it was a fruit.

Your assertation that fruit and vegetables are not mutually exclusive terms is also wrong with regards to question being asked in the OP. It asks if a tomato is a fruit OR a vegetable.

Scientific lanaguage is very precise - it has to be in order to be any use in a scientific methology. Whereas language in general use is much more loose in terms of definition. You seem to be getting scientific language and general language mixed up in your statements about correctness. I don't think correct can be used in the sense that you use it. It is an absolute terms. Either something is correct or it isn't. You can say something is more accurate, but you can't say something is more correct, or more true.

Though I refuted your claim that fruit and vegetable are not mutually exclusive terms, I do actually agree with your statement, but not your conclusion. It is true to say that a tomato is a fruit. It is also true to say a tomato is a vegetable. End of story.

definitions used:
Fruit: the usually edible reproductive body of a seed plant
Vegetable: a usually herbaceous plant (as the cabbage, bean, or potato) grown for an edible part that is usually eaten as part of a meal; also : such edible part

Its a fruit thats usually eaten as a vegetable. what difference could it possibly make anyway? Its like arguaing whether Jaffa cakes are really cakes or biscuits. Theyre clearly buns.

Qualifiers are very important. If I asked you whether a tomato was a fruit according to the SCOTUS ruling on Nix vs. Hedden then it would be wrong to answer that it was a fruit.that would be, as far as I can see, the ONLY time I would be incorrect in calling a tomato a fruit, and that is also a very specific qualifier. In every other case I can think of, defining it as a fruit would be correct.

Your assertation that fruit and vegetables are not mutually exclusive terms is also wrong with regards to question being asked in the OP. It asks if a tomato is a fruit OR a vegetable.And my answer is that it can be defined as both. Therefore, it is not wrong.

Scientific lanaguage is very precise - it has to be in order to be any use in a scientific methology. Whereas language in general use is much more loose in terms of definition. You seem to be getting scientific language and general language mixed up in your statements about correctness. I don't think correct can be used in the sense that you use it. It is an absolute terms. Either something is correct or it isn't. You can say something is more accurate, but you can't say something is more correct, or more true.you can, as I did. Also, things aren't always "correct" or "incorrect", as there are aspects of both which can be defined as "correct". additionally, just because A is correct does not imply, in any way shape or form, that B is definatly incorrect. I am a boy. that is correct. I am also a man (UGH! *chest thump*). That is correct and more accurate.

Though I refuted your claim that fruit and vegetable are not mutually exclusive terms, I do actually agree with your statement, but not your conclusion. It is true to say that a tomato is a fruit. It is also true to say a tomato is a vegetable. End of story.Is that not pretty much the same conclusion I came to? Yes, it is both a fruit and a vegetable (as vegetable is not a specific term), however, fruit is more accurate and precise (similarly, this is a bone, it is also a femur. Femur is more accurate and precise. This is a vegetable, it is also a fruit. Fruit is more accurate and precise)

that would be, as far as I can see, the ONLY time I would be incorrect in calling a tomato a fruit, and that is also a very specific qualifier. In every other case I can think of, defining it as a fruit would be correct.Using the definition I gave for vegetable then it is never incorrect to refer to a tomato as a vegetable, as the definition includes fruit as a subset. Hence, in general it is more accurate to refer to a tomato as a vegetable.

And my answer is that it can be defined as both. Therefore, it is not wrong.Not only that, but you are also saying the question is incorrect in its assumptions.
you can, as I did. Also, things aren't always "correct" or "incorrect", as there are aspects of both which can be defined as "correct". additionally, just because A is correct does not imply, in any way shape or form, that B is definatly incorrect. I am a boy. that is correct. I am also a man (UGH! *chest thump*). That is correct and more accurate.Depends on the definitions you use. If you define boy to be 'under 18', and man to be '18 and older' then you could be wrong to say you were both a boy and a man. However, boy can also mean 'young man', hence both statements could be true. You were saying that statement can be 'correcter' than another statement. That's just not right. A simple statement is either correct or it isn't. Your logic statement is good, but if you introduce a statement about mutal exclusivity then such statements can be made. Bah, I wish I could drawa couple of Venn diagrams, then explaining what I'm trying to say would be so much simpler.

Is that not pretty much the same conclusion I came to? Yes, it is both a fruit and a vegetable (as vegetable is not a specific term), however, fruit is more accurate and precise (similarly, this is a bone, it is also a femur. Femur is more accurate and precise. This is a vegetable, it is also a fruit. Fruit is more accurate and precise)[/QUOTE]Hmm. I think precise is a better word to use than accurate. Both statements are perfectly accurate, but the fruit statement is more thoroughly defined and hence more precise.

I'm sorry if I'm not making much sense, but I'm tired.

its a vegeteble.

the fact is that a tomato is a fruit. Regardless of qualifiers. It is a fruit.


although, this whole debate is really really pointless (moreso than NS usually is) as vegetable is not an exclusive term as fruit is. Fruit is very clearly defined, but being a vegetable does not rule out also being a fruit (look at zuchinni and squash and the like). However, it IS most accurate, and most correct, to say that a tomato is a fruit.

Another example is the Red Panda. For a while, it was considered to be of the same family as raccoons. New genetic evidence shows that may actually be a part of the bear family. Neither is technically incorrect, but it is more correct to say that it is part of the bear familyNo, no NO don't do it! Noooooooo!

Using the definition I gave for vegetable then it is never incorrect to refer to a tomato as a vegetable, as the definition includes fruit as a subset. Hence, in general it is more accurate to refer to a tomato as a vegetable.but the most accurate way to describe something is by the most precise, and therefore, most limited, descriptor. For example, it is not incorrect to say that a human is an animal, nor is it incorrect to say that a human is a homo sapien. However, it is more informative to state the latter.

Not only that, but you are also saying the question is incorrect in its assumptions.well, essentially, it is. This isn't really an "either/or" question, despite being phrased as such. I maintain that it is, in fact, both, but labling it "fruit" is more precise and accurate. In the case of my answer, the question is wrong in its assumptions

Depends on the definitions you use. If you define boy to be 'under 18', and man to be '18 and older' then you could be wrong to say you were both a boy and a man. However, boy can also mean 'young man', hence both statements could be true. You were saying that statement can be 'correcter' than another statement. That's just not right. A simple statement is either correct or it isn't. Your logic statement is good, but if you introduce a statement about mutal exclusivity then such statements can be made. Bah, I wish I could drawa couple of Venn diagrams, then explaining what I'm trying to say would be so much simpler.Don't worry about not being clear...I'm getting your point well enough. And yes, it does depend on definition...and I really do think we're arguing the same essential point (that it is both a fruit and a vegetable)...you are placing more emphasis on vegetable, while I emphasize fruit. Using the term "correct" in the case that I was using it was to mean not false, and being "more correct" being more precise and accurate. Statements can be more or less correct because they are more or less precise or accurate. I could come up with some kind of example, but honestly, my head hurts...haha

Hmm. I think precise is a better word to use than accurate. Both statements are perfectly accurate, but the fruit statement is more thoroughly defined and hence more precise. well, precise and accurate go together. I'll use an example that might fail without a drawing, but here's trying...
Imagine a bullseye and 5 arrows. You shoot the five arrows. All five land randomly around, some missing, some hitting, etc. This is neither precise or accurate. Now, take those five same arrows, and shoot them again. This time, they all land in a clump, but on the outer ring. You were precise, but not accurate (ie. you hit them all in the same area, but not the target area). You shoot them again, and they all clump around the bullseye. You were both precise and accurate.

I'm sorry if I'm not making much sense, but I'm tired.
I hear that...don't worry, I'm tired too, so same applies.



No, no NO don't do it! Noooooooo!
:confused:

ps...we should figure out a first post for that thread...

I don't care it tastes good on burgers and by itself with almost any kind of oily italian dressing and spread in chunks on Focaccia bread.

technically a fruit, used as a veggie.

Seriously:

Why has this debate gone on for so many pages? Why is this debate even happening? A tomato is a fruit. Calling it a fruit is therefore correct. Calling it a vegetable, for any reason whatsoever, is wrong.

What's next? A debate on whether a pig is a mammal or a fish?

Seriously:

Why has this debate gone on for so many pages? Why is this debate even happening? A tomato is a fruit. Calling it a fruit is therefore correct. Calling it a vegetable, for any reason whatsoever, is wrong.

What's next? A debate on whether a pig is a mammal or a fish?
several reasons...
1) it's debatable what is the most accurate defn (calling it a vegetable isn't technically wrong)
4) because I've never been able to spell vegetable correctly, and want to show off that I've finally learned
1) I"m sick of debating religion, politics, and teh gayz.
5) It's NSGen.

ps...we should figure out a first post for that thread...
I got one. Medical experiences.
I'll volley, or you can if you want. I have a few.
It'll be a spam dance if we don't do it right, though ya know. ;)

several reasons...
1) it's debatable what is the most accurate defn (calling it a vegetable isn't technically wrong)
4) because I've never been able to spell vegetable correctly, and want to show off that I've finally learned
1) I"m sick of debating religion, politics, and teh gayz.
5) It's NSGen.
Word! :D

but that's because I'm still trying to decipher your numbering system... :confused:

I don't understand why this thread is as long as it is.
There aren't exactly a lot of sides to this issue.
Either it's a vegeatble or it's a fruit. :rolleyes:

I don't understand why this thread is as long as it is.
There aren't exactly a lot of sides to this issue.
Either it's a vegeatble or it's a fruit. :rolleyes:actually it's both if you're American.

Fruit by scientific definition. Vegetable by Surpreme court decision... AKA Law.

actually it's both if you're American.

Fruit by scientific definition. Vegetable by Surpreme court decision... AKA Law.
Typical of U.S. arguments though ... relatively simple issues turn into longwinded vitriolic flamefests.
Mod forbid someone brings up "Tastes Great/Less Filling" or
"Coke/Pepsi"
or
"Chevy/Ford"
:eek:

It's a fruit, no question. But then the US also class rhubarb as a fruit, when it is actually a vegetable. SCREWED UP!!!

actually it's both if you're American.

Fruit by scientific definition. Vegetable by Surpreme court decision... AKA Law.

So I read. But I find it silly that the American Supreme Court has decision power over something which belongs in the realm of botany. They shouldn't be able to arbitrarily decide something which isn't really up to them, ney?

So I read. But I find it silly that the American Supreme Court has decision power over something which belongs in the realm of botany. They shouldn't be able to arbitrarily decide something which isn't really up to them, ney?
actually what's sillier is why they did it.

Vegetables were taxed (trade Tariffs) Fruits were not. because the Tomato classification was sketchy at best... Fruit to avoid the Tariffs, but Vegetable due to use, the Surpreme court opted to tax them and thus they were labelled a Veggie.

behold the power of the US Surpreme Court.

Typical of U.S. arguments though ... relatively simple issues turn into longwinded vitriolic flamefests.
Mod forbid someone brings up "Tastes Great/Less Filling" or
"Coke/Pepsi"
or
"Chevy/Ford"
:eek:
don't forget the KFC delima.

Breasts?
Legs?
or Thighs?

and what long flamefests... I didn't vote because there was no both/either/other/MYRTH option.

actually what's sillier is why they did it.

Vegetables were taxed (trade Tariffs) Fruits were not. because the Tomato classification was sketchy at best... Fruit to avoid the Tariffs, but Vegetable due to use, the Surpreme court opted to tax them and thus they were labelled a Veggie.

behold the power of the US Surpreme Court.

:rolleyes:

It's a fruit, no question. But then the US also class rhubarb as a fruit, when it is actually a vegetable. SCREWED UP!!!because it was actually made into a pie. so I guess they said, since the tomato (a fruit) was not made into a wholesome desert, but this was...

Tasted Rhubarb once... man that was tart!

don't forget the KFC delima.

Breasts?
Legs?
or Thighs?
:eek:
"Never did I dream we'd get the trifecta."
-—Houston, Texas, June 14, 2002

:rolleyes:
what?!?... don't believe me... Wiki it. they'll say that Tariffs was the reason why Tomatos were classified as Veggies.

and no one's argued against it... YET! ;)

what?!?... don't believe me... Wiki it. they'll say that Tariffs was the reason why Tomatos were classified as Veggies.

and no one's argued against it... YET! ;)

Don't get me wrong, I would believe almost anything someone said about America :p
The roll eyes was just my way of saying "America's legal system has some issues" lol

because it was actually made into a pie. so I guess they said, since the tomato (a fruit) was not made into a wholesome desert, but this was...

Tasted Rhubarb once... man that was tart!

You gotta admit tho, it's not right to classify them by use, it's a question of scientific fact.

But then what place does science have in the US? Unless its thinking up more efficient ways of destroying their enemies!:gundge:

Don't get me wrong, I would believe almost anything someone said about America :p
The roll eyes was just my way of saying "America's legal system has some issues" lol
oh... well that I agree with.

You gotta admit tho, it's not right to classify them by use, it's a question of scientific fact.

But then what place does science have in the US? Unless its thinking up more efficient ways of destroying their enemies!:gundge:
and making money... that is... of course... the bottom line. ;)

oh... well that I agree with.

You were looking for a fight? :p

You were looking for a fight? :p
NEVER...
Just didn't want any misunderstandings. many a flamewar was started by one.

besides, there are alot of threads where you don't look for a Fight... it just finds you. :D

NEVER...
Just didn't want any misunderstandings. many a flamewar was started by one.

I don't think I do/say anything particularly inflammatory on this forum...:D

besides, there are alot of threads where you don't look for a Fight... it just finds you. :D

But hey, what can you do? ;)

I don't think I do/say anything particularly inflammatory on this forum...:Dnot you... me. I don't want anything I say to be misunderstood. that's all. :)

But hey, what can you do? ;)
Ahem...
*points to Sig at the bottom.*

but the most accurate way to describe something is by the most precise, and therefore, most limited, descriptor. For example, it is not incorrect to say that a human is an animal, nor is it incorrect to say that a human is a homo sapien. However, it is more informative to state the latter.

well, essentially, it is. This isn't really an "either/or" question, despite being phrased as such. I maintain that it is, in fact, both, but labling it "fruit" is more precise and accurate. In the case of my answer, the question is wrong in its assumptions

Don't worry about not being clear...I'm getting your point well enough. And yes, it does depend on definition...and I really do think we're arguing the same essential point (that it is both a fruit and a vegetable)...you are placing more emphasis on vegetable, while I emphasize fruit. Using the term "correct" in the case that I was using it was to mean not false, and being "more correct" being more precise and accurate. Statements can be more or less correct because they are more or less precise or accurate. I could come up with some kind of example, but honestly, my head hurts...hahaOkay, you've convinced me on your use of the term accurate (I prefered your human example to your bullseye example). However, you have not quite convinced me on the implication that it is therefore better to say a tomato is a fruit.

I'm going to try and bring all our lengthy posts into something more concise. The basis of your argument that fruit is a better discriptor is that it is more precise and limited and therefore better. Whereas my argument is that vegetable is the more common descriptor in use and therefore better.

I can see the validity of both arguments, but I think my position hinges on the fact that vegetable is a more useful descriptor for the majority than the fruit descriptor. I think if your discusion is to move any further it will undoubtably move into an argument about relativism and absolutism (right word?).

To all those who are wondering how we can go on so long about the same limited topic. Try and look what we're actually talking about. It's no longer a discussion about the tomato, but about language, with the tomato as a case study.

Most enjoyable debate I've have on NS for ages... except for that guy who used profanity in relation to me and called me a simpleton. But I'm thick skinned and didn't really care. I love playing devil's advocate. :D

not you... me. I don't want anything I say to be misunderstood. that's all. :)

Ahem...
*points to Sig at the bottom.*

"I'm sorry, it's not you, it's me.."
*clears throat*

Ah yes, I have sigs turned off, but would I be correct in supposing that yours is the amusing one about forum fires? :D

"I'm sorry, it's not you, it's me.."
*clears throat*
obviously...but unlike any other times you may have heard it. I tend to speak the truth when it comes to Misunderstandings. After all, You're so much more intelligent and socially graceful than I am... Infact you are soo much better that I don't deserve to go out with yo... err... sorry. what were we talking about? :p
Ah yes, I have sigs turned off, but would I be correct in supposing that yours is the amusing one about forum fires? :D
oh... didn't know that. here it is.

I, Junii, will be careful to avoid starting forum fires. I will take appropriate action to prevent any forum fires that may potentially inflame the forum or parts of it. I will do my best to put out any forum fires that arise. [First member of the NS General Forum FireFighters (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=441343)]

And normal people need normal, sensible ways of doing things.

ROFLMAO!

Personnally, I've never seen anything all that sensible about normal people.

obviously...but unlike any other times you may have heard it. I tend to speak the truth when it comes to Misunderstandings. After all, You're so much more intelligent and socially graceful than I am... Infact you are soo much better that I don't deserve to go out with yo... err... sorry. what were we talking about? :p .

Rofl :D I'm tempted to add that to my sig. lol

oh... didn't know that. here it is.

Why thankyou :)

Fruit.. A pretty crappy one though. I'll take an apple or orange any day.

Just to confuse people more, lets create a middle section between vegetables and fruit and put tomatoes in there.

Rofl :D I'm tempted to add that to my sig. lol



Why thankyou :)
:D Thanks. *sniff* I've been sigged... this is my first... *sniff*

According to Science Vegetables don't exist!

It is too fleshy to be a Vegetable in my opinion, i used to say vegetable but it seems like a fruit, but then who would put a fruit in a Ham sandwich???

What is an Avacado, apart form an Enlarged Green testicle?

:D Thanks. *sniff* I've been sigged... this is my first... *sniff*

Aww, what has everyone else been thinking not to sig you! :eek:

Congratulatory fluffle for your first sigging: :fluffle:

I did read it. But I found it irrelevant as you are simply talking about the botanical definition of fruit. I don't disagree with this definition, but the majority of the population are not botanists and have a more narrow definition of the word fruit. I am arguing that this definition is more important, and therefore when asking whether a tomato is a fruit or not (without any qualifying terms), then it is a vegetable, unless you add a qualifying term. Such as: 'In terms of botany, is a tomato a fruit or not?'. In which case a tomato is a fruit.

However...Make your mind up. ;)

Okay, whatever. I guess if, in your mind, tomato is a vegetable then its a vegetable regardless of reality.

Not really, no, seeing as 2+2=5 is a mathematical definition and not a linguistical one. However, mathematics is only a model. So if humanity decided to redefine the model, then it could. Whether the model would still be effective for modeling the universe is another question.

Its not a model. The idea of taking 2 and 2 and making 4 is a concept that will never change.

The Sun DOES orbit around the Earth. The Earth exerts a gravitational pull upon the Sun, and as such the Sun, to a certain extent, is orbiting around the Earth. However, defining the Earth as the centre of the solar system makes the modeling of the orbits of the planets, comets and asteroids much harder than if the Sun were defined as the centre of the solar system. This is because the Sun has the largest gravitational field of all the bodies in the solar system.

This is one of the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard. The sun and the earth are not a binary system.


Don't use science in an argument about language. It doesn't work.
Personal attacks are a no-no. Take a deep breath and relax. I'm not trying to attack you personally with my posts.

Dont use language in an argument about science. Tomato is a fruit, end of story. And I could really care less what you define a fruit as. There is a standard definition of a fruit, and the reason everyone is confused about a tomato is because they think like you.

I consider stupidity a personal attack.

Wow. I ignored this thread because I thought it would die a well deserved death. But since it's gone on this long...


The answer is in the way language is used. The two words are at different levels of abstraction and different levels of common usage.

Vegetable is a far more abstract term than fruit. Vegetable is so abstract that all things fall into three catagories: Animal, vegetable, or mineral. At this level of abstraction a tomato is obviously a vegetable. But then so is grass, trees, seaweed and fungus.

Fruit on the other hand, is at the level of description of different types of seed bearing for those vegetables that produce seed. At that level a tomato is a fruit because it produces seed contained in the swelled ovary of the flower. But then at this level a pumpkin is a fruit, a bean is a fruit, an eggplant is a fruit.

This brings us to common usage. In common US usage a vegetable is generally eaten with salt and a fruit is generally eaten with sugar. So at the common useage level it depends if you put salt or sugar on your tomato.

Its good to see the courts bringing the dictionary up to date with public ignorance.

Kiwis are brown, have no tail, cannot fly, and come from New Zealand.




But which kiwi do I mean?????
Dum dum dum.....
Obviously you're talking about the bird because I've seen a fruitfly.

It's a pizza sauce...

Botanical. Fruit.

I consider stupidity a personal attack.
I consider that a personal attack. Don't make them if you want your stay on the forums to be long and pleasant.

Oh yeah, and your understanding of orbital mechanics verges on the nub. The Sun and Earth orbit a common centre of gravity - this has been known since 1606. :rolleyes:

Obviously you're talking about the bird because I've seen a fruitfly.
*rim shot*

A tomato is a fruit as it has seeds ... on the inside ... only berrys have seeds on the outside ;)

Word! :D

but that's because I'm still trying to decipher your numbering system... :confused:
haha...first 4 numbers of pi after the decimal. i got bored.

This is the weirdest thing I've ever come across on Google today.

"Nix v. Hedden

Botanically, a tomato is a fruit. However, in common parlance it is seen as a vegetable, hence the United States Supreme Court ruled that legally, a tomato is a vegetable"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nix_v._Hedden

So, what say you?

Weird!

Fruit is a clearly defined scientific term. Vegetable is an informal term used in everyday speech which does not have a clearly defined scientific meaning. So strictly speaking a tomato is both, since they are not, as most people think, mutually exclusive.

Both!!!

This brings us to common usage. In common US usage a vegetable is generally eaten with salt and a fruit is generally eaten with sugar. So at the common useage level it depends if you put salt or sugar on your tomato.
What if you eat it plain?

What if you eat it plain?

Then it's a mineral.

Then it's a mineral.
In my practice, then, all former fruits and vegetables are now minerals. With the possible exception of papaya, which I eat with black pepper... making it an animal. :p

This is the weirdest thing I've ever come across on Google today.

"Nix v. Hedden

Botanically, a tomato is a fruit. However, in common parlance it is seen as a vegetable, hence the United States Supreme Court ruled that legally, a tomato is a vegetable"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nix_v._Hedden

So, what say you?

The Supreme Court aren't the same ninnies who decided that pi=3, are they? Saying tomatoes are vegetables when they quite simply are not seems just about as stupid. By the way, cucumbers and zucchini are also fruit, as are squashes and all other gourds. So are peas and beans (the musical fruit). Basically, anything with seeds, i.e., the reproductive portions of the plant, are fruits. Everything else is a vegetable.

. . . beans (the musical fruit) . . .

I haven't heard that one since the sixth grade. :eek:

A tomato is a fruit as it has seeds ... on the inside ... only berrys have seeds on the outside ;)
not true. peppers, and, go figure, tomatos are berries.

Potatoes aren't frutis or vegetables. They are roots.

Potatoes aren't frutis or vegetables. They are roots.

Tubers, actually, sort of like enlarged stems -- the things that sprout out of the eyes are the roots.

It's a vegetable. All other fruits grow on trees. Do tomatoes grow on trees? Nope.

How about berries (blue-, straw-, cran-, rasp-, etc)? Vegetables?

The most literal difference is that fruit grows above the ground, and vegetables grow below the ground.

Carrots, below.

Apples, above.

I don't know anyone who refers to tomatos as vegetables.

The most literal difference is that fruit grows above the ground, and vegetables grow below the ground.

Carrots, below.

Apples, above.

I don't know anyone who refers to tomatos as vegetables.
*Adds a cabbage to his fruit salad.*

How about berries (blue-, straw-, cran-, rasp-, etc)? Vegetables?
Strawberries and raspberries aren't berries. In strawberries only the external seeds are considered true fruits, and they're achenes, like sunflower seeds. Raspberries are clusters of drupelets.

According to Science Vegetables don't exist!

It is too fleshy to be a Vegetable in my opinion, i used to say vegetable but it seems like a fruit, but then who would put a fruit in a Ham sandwich???

I kind of like Hawaiian pizza, which is ham and pineapple, so a slice of pineapple in a ham sandwich might not be too bad. And we do eat applesauce with pork chops, and cranberry sauce with turkey. Fruit and meat go very nicely together.

What is an Avacado, apart form an Enlarged Green testicle?

It's a fruit.

*Adds a cabbage to his fruit salad.*
Good point.

This is the weirdest thing I've ever come across on Google today.

"Nix v. Hedden

Botanically, a tomato is a fruit. However, in common parlance it is seen as a vegetable, hence the United States Supreme Court ruled that legally, a tomato is a vegetable"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nix_v._Hedden

So, what say you?
More proof that the US Government hates science!

I haven't heard that one since the sixth grade. :eek:

Marijuana is also a fruit, of course, because it has edible seeds. "Pot, pot, the magical fruit. The more you buy, the more you hoot. The more you hoot, the better you feel. So make each meal a Happy Meal."

Now, something no one's bothered with so far: what about genetically modified tomatoes that have, say, pig genes in them for whatever reason. Are they part animal now? And can Jews and Muslims eat them?

Now, something no one's bothered with so far: what about genetically modified tomatoes that have, say, pig genes in them for whatever reason. Are they part animal now? And can Jews and Muslims eat them?It's only an issue if the tomatoes have hooves, and whether they're split or not.. (Or something like that).

How about berries (blue-, straw-, cran-, rasp-, etc)? Vegetables?
ironically, none of those are true berries. some true berries are grape, cucumber, tomato, date, persimmon, eggplant, guava, chile pepper, banana

oh, and potato is a vegetable as well as a tuber. Vegetable still isn't a biological term, and therefore, a tuber, like a fruit, can be a vegetable.

It has seeds, therefore it is a fruit. I love America.

ironically, none of those are true berries. some true berries are grape, cucumber, tomato, date, persimmon, eggplant, guava, chile pepper, banana

oh, and potato is a vegetable as well as a tuber. Vegetable still isn't a biological term, and therefore, a tuber, like a fruit, can be a vegetable.
Actually, a grape, cucumber, date, eggplant and pepper are all scientifically fruits as they are the enlarged ovum of the flower that contains seeds.

A banana is actually the petal of the bloom. (Like an artichoke) All bananas today are female. No one knows what happened to the males but they may have been killed by humans because they didn't produce food. Today they have to be reproduced asexually by humans.

Seriously:

Why has this debate gone on for so many pages? Why is this debate even happening? A tomato is a fruit. Calling it a fruit is therefore correct. Calling it a vegetable, for any reason whatsoever, is wrong.

What's next? A debate on whether a pig is a mammal or a fish?
Something you might not know:

Pigs can breathe under water.

The Supreme Court aren't the same ninnies who decided that pi=3, are they?
Whole numbers make math easier.

Actually the comparison is:

Is a pig an animal or a mammal? Both because they are different levels of abstraction.

Actually, a grape, cucumber, date, eggplant and pepper are all scientifically fruits as they are the enlarged ovum of the flower that contains seeds.

A banana is actually the petal of the bloom. (Like an artichoke) All bananas today are female. No one knows what happened to the males but they may have been killed by humans because they didn't produce food. Today they have to be reproduced asexually by humans.
few small problems...well, one I know, one I think I remember
a berry is a fruit, just a more specific. And all of those are berrys by the biological defn (An indehiscent fruit derived from a single ovary and having the whole wall fleshy, such as the grape or tomato.) Banana, I now have questions about...the wiki article for berry puts it as a true berry, while the article for banana has it as a false berry...hmm....

my other thing is the banana...if I remember an article that I read a while ago, a very small number of bananas will actually produce one or two fertile seeds, but we bred them to have no seeds. I could be completely wrong on that, but the part out asexual reproduction is definatly true. hence why they are at such risk for fungus.

court also allows eminent domain for economic reasons - so it has done several wrong verdicts - idiocy:gundge: :gundge: :gundge: :gundge:

I consider stupidity a personal attack.
Oh mods lawdy no. :eek:
The line's been drawn in the sand. As Picard said, "No further!"

BTW, +2

More proof that the US Government hates science!
And they hate botany!

Okay, you've convinced me on your use of the term accurate (I prefered your human example to your bullseye example). However, you have not quite convinced me on the implication that it is therefore better to say a tomato is a fruithaha...the bullseye example came from my snr. physics teacher in high school. He was quite the druggie.

I'm going to try and bring all our lengthy posts into something more concise. The basis of your argument that fruit is a better discriptor is that it is more precise and limited and therefore better. Whereas my argument is that vegetable is the more common descriptor in use and therefore better.yep, that about covers it

I can see the validity of both arguments, but I think my position hinges on the fact that vegetable is a more useful descriptor for the majority than the fruit descriptor. I think if your discusion is to move any further it will undoubtably move into an argument about relativism and absolutism (right word?).yeah, there is a decent chance of that........dammit, I swear I just had a good ex. damn my short term memory lapses.

OH! just thought of it. I don't feel like typing it up here, but look at Grice's theory of maxims of speech (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grice's_maxims). Under that, you should state the most informative of the two (although, that doesn't fully work, as "vegetable" and "fruit" aren't calculable, and therefore, a true implicator can't be drawn.)

To all those who are wondering how we can go on so long about the same limited topic. Try and look what we're actually talking about. It's no longer a discussion about the tomato, but about language, with the tomato as a case study.I don't think those people actually read the thread. nor do I think they have any idea about how bored people on NS can become to even begin a debate about tomatos in the first place...

Most enjoyable debate I've have on NS for ages... except for that guy who used profanity in relation to me and called me a simpleton. But I'm thick skinned and didn't really care. I love playing devil's advocate. :D
haha...ditto this being one of the top debates. You did quite well, and actually made me think (sorry I missed this post for so long) cheers mate.

I consider that a personal attack. Don't make them if you want your stay on the forums to be long and pleasant.

Oh yeah, and your understanding of orbital mechanics verges on the nub. The Sun and Earth orbit a common centre of gravity - this has been known since 1606. :rolleyes:

The earth orbits the sun, the sun orbits the center of the galaxy. If by transitive property you want to say the earth orbits this galactic center, fine, whatever, I am not going to argue semantics. But they in no way orbit each other like whoever it was said it. The sun is travelling about 250 km/s around this galactic center, which is way faster than earths escape velocity. Theres no way the sun can orbit the earth. While the earth does exert a gravitational force on the sun, albeit negligible, that in no way means the sun revolves around the earth at all.

BTW, +2

I dont know what this means.

The earth orbits the sun, the sun orbits the center of the galaxy. If by transitive property you want to say the earth orbits this galactic center, fine, whatever, I am not going to argue semantics. But they in no way orbit each other like whoever it was said it. The sun is travelling about 250 km/s around this galactic center, which is way faster than earths escape velocity. Theres no way the sun can orbit the earth. While the earth does exert a gravitational force on the sun, albeit negligible, that in no way means the sun revolves around the earth at all.



I dont know what this means.
No, what he's saying is that they both orbit around a common center of gravity which happens to be alot closer to the center of the sun due to the greater mass of the sun.

The earth orbits the sun, the sun orbits the center of the galaxy. If by transitive property you want to say the earth orbits this galactic center, fine, whatever, I am not going to argue semantics. But they in no way orbit each other like whoever it was said it. The sun is travelling about 250 km/s around this galactic center, which is way faster than earths escape velocity. Theres no way the sun can orbit the earth. While the earth does exert a gravitational force on the sun, albeit negligible, that in no way means the sun revolves around the earth at all.
You'll agree with me that there is no absolute position from which he can measure the velocity and position of an object from in space, right? Therefore, if you pick an object and define it as your origin then you will notice the other objects are rotating around this point. If you drew a diagram of the orbits of the sun and planetary bodies around the Earth you would find that the Sun orbits in an ellipitcally and the orbits of the planets would look like a pattern you would get from a spirograph.

Your point about the sun rotating around the galaxy at 250km/s. Is not the Earth also rotating round the centre of the galaxy at 250km/s? Therefore their movements relative to each other are not affected by the gravitational pull of the galaxy.

Meh, this will have to do.

The earth orbits the sun, the sun orbits the center of the galaxy. If by transitive property you want to say the earth orbits this galactic center, fine, whatever, I am not going to argue semantics. But they in no way orbit each other like whoever it was said it. The sun is travelling about 250 km/s around this galactic center, which is way faster than earths escape velocity. Theres no way the sun can orbit the earth. While the earth does exert a gravitational force on the sun, albeit negligible, that in no way means the sun revolves around the earth at all.

When talking about celestial bodies, the center of mass has a special relevance: when a moon orbits around planet, or a planet orbits around a star, both of them are actually orbiting around their center of mass, called the barycenter, see two-body problem.

The barycenter (from the Greek βαρύκεντρον) is the center of mass of two or more bodies which are orbiting each other, and is the point around which both of them orbit. It is an important concept in the fields of astronomy, astrophysics, and the like.

In the case where one of the two objects is much larger and more massive than the other, the barycenter will be located within the larger object. Rather than appearing to orbit it will simply be seen to "wobble" slightly. This is the case for the Moon and Earth, where the barycenter is located on average 4,671 km from Earth's center, well within the planet's radius of 6,378 km. When the two bodies are of similar masses (or at least the mass ratio is less extreme), however, the barycenter will be located outside of either of them and both bodies will follow an orbit around it. This is the case for Pluto and Charon, Jupiter and the Sun, and many binary asteroids and binary stars.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Center_of_gravity#Barycenter

Actually the comparison is:

Is a pig an animal or a mammal?


Yes

No, what he's saying is that they both orbit around a common center of gravity which happens to be alot closer to the center of the sun due to the greater mass of the sun.
Thus: A tomato is a fruit.

I dont know what this means.
Ah, it's already been taken care of.
I could belabour it, but meh.
It's all a matter of choice of words, really.

Tomato Thread Lives!

Tomato Thread Lives!
...hasn't wilted away as of yet, it appears. :p

Fruitable :)

What a fruity topic. :)

...hasn't wilted away as of yet, it appears. :p
Well, there's always tomatorrow.

I'm no good at this....

Well, there's always tomatorow.

I'm no good at this....
Point for effort ... :p
how 'bout TWO "r"'s?

Point for effort ... :p
how 'bout TWO "r"'s?
What a tomato of a tamoto.

What a tomato of a tamoto.
Verily, tuber whispers on thy breath.
http://www.websmileys.com/sm/fingers/fing01.gif

This is the weirdest thing I've ever come across on Google today.

"Nix v. Hedden

Botanically, a tomato is a fruit. However, in common parlance it is seen as a vegetable, hence the United States Supreme Court ruled that legally, a tomato is a vegetable"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nix_v._Hedden

So, what say you?

I like it because it's red.

Verily, tuber whispers on thy breath.
http://www.websmileys.com/sm/fingers/fing01.gif
:eek:

I think this makes sense now. Tomatoes are time-travelling, intergalactic aliens that have landed on Earth to conquer our sentient species, but were pushed back by a brave team of cavemen heroes (inexplicably in possession of American accents), destroying the tomato group-mind, turning them into food for humanity.

Or maybe I just need get out of bed, and leave the keyboard off my doona.

Or maybe I just need get out of bed, and leave the keyboard off my doona.
...off your WHAT?!? :eek:
Uhm, where else would you keep it when you're in bed, other than your ... doona ... ?