Trees are NOT alive.

Status
Not open for further replies.
It depends on how free you are with the term alive. You can say a light bulb is alive too but a light bulb is made by a human and humans were made by nature. A fish that can jump a foot out of water is alive. This is an entirely different level of life.

It seems you are defining life by the ability to move here.
Then what about Venus Fly traps ? They move and react immediately to a fly landing on their specialized leafs.

800px-Meal_worm_in_venus_fly_trap.jpg
 
Again, the term 'alive' is not restricted to a state of consciousness, John, nor is restricted to humans.

I think it is related to some form of consciousness. If the term is used correctly.

So if you cut off a flower and just leave it lying there is doesn't die ?

Look at it this way. An electrician sees wires as alive and dead, by your reasoning the wire is really alive just as in a human is alive. Sure you can say that a tree is alive but if you go by the strict usage of the word than it is not alive but living. Once you put the 'a' (think of asexual) it changes the word to where a tree would not accurately qualify.
 
Last edited:
Look at it this way. An electrician sees wires as alive and dead, by your reasoning the wire is really alive just as in a human is alive. Sure you can say that a tree is alive but if you go by the strict usage of the word than it is not alive but living. Once you put the a (think of asexual) it changes the word to where a tree would not accurately qualify.

You are indeed a troll. It's either that or you are a retard.

a·live
adj.
1. Having life; living. See Synonyms at living.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/alive

liv·ing
–adjective
1. having life; being alive; not dead: living persons.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/living

life
noun
2. the experience of being alive
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/life
 
ENMOS,

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=semantics&x=0&y=0

We may as well compare electrical wires to humans. They are both "alive".

As for your Venus Flytrap argument. that just supports my argument because there are different levels of being alive and to put a tree in that catagory with so many legitimate counterarguments then i don't believe a tee accurately meets the requirements as to being alive.
 
ENMOS,

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=semantics&x=0&y=0

We may as well compare electrical wires to humans. They are both "alive".

As for your Venus Flytrap argument. that just supports my argument because there are different levels of being alive and to put a tree in that catagory with so many legitimate counterarguments then i don't believe a tee accurately meets the requirements as to being alive.

Last chance to admit that you were just trolling and that trees are living organisms before I consider you a complete imbecile.
 
Last chance to admit that you were just trolling and that trees are living organisms before I consider you a complete imbecile.

No offense intended but there are also levels to human cognitive ability. I would say that to be average has many advantages.
 
No offense intended but there are also levels to human cognitive ability. I would say that to be average has many advantages.

If you are still pretending that trees are not alive I wouldn't consider you average at all but far below.
 
It doesn't matter what his definition is based on, it's scientifically wrong and he denies that.

i know,i just think that there is an interesting conversation that is being missed because of point scoring.(on both sides)
 
We are coming from two entirely different realms of understanding. The tree is green, it is alive...flip a switch and a wire is alive.

The problem is how the term relates to organic matter.
 
We are coming from two entirely different realms of understanding. The tree is green, it is alive...flip a switch and a wire is alive.

The problem is how the term relates to organic matter.

Welcome to my ignore list.
Please educate yourself.
 
He did call me a retard (http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=1943959&postcount=44) and an imbecile. I do understand his frustration but people think differently.

No I didn't, I called you a troll.
And I told you that I would consider you a complete imbecile if you would not admit that you are a troll. I never actually called you an imbecile.

And I can perfectly take it when people think differently, it happens all the time. But this is just ridiculous. You are a troll.
This was my last reply to you, at least for a while.

You are in good company though: OilIsMastery and Pronatalist.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top