Is fennel a meme vegetable? Tastes like sugar

Harhar

>tastes like sugar
Is the word you're looking for "sweet"?

He is meeming you ;)

Bad meme.

You think you're clever, don't you?

;)

>adulterated with other ingredients
>"real" """""""licorice""""""""

Yeah? What brand? I grew up on Tabu and that other one with the nun on it. Neither taste of anise to me at all and nor do either burn. I love both real licorice and fennel (the vegetable) but dislike aniseed and fennel seed taste. Don't hate it, mind, just don't actively seek out that taste.

It doesn't taste that much different, homie. You have a better comparison for fennel?

Like celery and dill had a baby. Even kind of looks like it.

>dill
No way nigga

Yes way. Very faint dill-like taste. Also faintly of parsley root (NOT parsnip).

>meme vegetable
Can the kids please leave?

What is a "meme vegetable"?

its great, you are just too dumb to cook it in the right way

what is a meme vegetable or meme food? something people like to eat? are onions and garlic also a meme?

fennel has a distinct, unique taste that people like to utilize.

>adulterated with other ingredients
>"real" """""""licorice""""""""
Most of them are not

If you're not going to follow the conversation, just don't post.

> Today, most people don't know what licorice really tastes like because most people, even ones who traditionally eat lots of "licorice," like Finns and Scandies, have never had the real stuff.
>I think the only country where real licorice is produced, eaten and popular is Italy.
IE, this thread says that Scandinavians don't have real licorice.

>we go too have real licorice in scandinavia!

>adulterated with other ingredients
>"real" """""""licorice""""""""

Again, it's it's real licorice, it's not adulterated like it is in Scandinavia. The stuff made and sold in Scandinavia for Scandinavian tastes includes essence of aniseed as an ingredient by default and lots of sugar. As a result, it tastes more of sweet aniseed than of licorice.
It's not bad, but it's not real licorice either. The Scandie stuff is to licorice as Spam is to real ham.

>The stuff made and sold in Scandinavia for Scandinavian tastes includes essence of aniseed as an ingredient by default
Much of it isn't

Not true, but thanks for playing.

anise and fennel literally produce the same characteristic chemical (anethole) as liquorice. you can't tell the difference, they are the same.

Oh, wow. I had no idea. I guess that's why Italian/sweet basil and cloves taste exactly alike, too! They both have eugenol! Thanks for letting me know, user! Wouldn't wanna look like an anethole, after all!

>Tastes like sugar.

What kind of fennel have you been eating?

kys

You made the statement. So I see no reason to take it seriously until you provide a source.

How about this: if it's as common as you say, why don't you provide evidence proving it wrong? If you want to challenge a claim, it's your job to provide the challenging evidence, not user's job to defend a baseless challenge. So go ahead and find an example of licorice manufactured in Scandinavia that doesn't have "added flavourings" in whatever the local language is listed on its ingredients list.
By the way, "added flavouring" in this example is code for aniseed and other similar extracts.

I'll wait.

you dumb nigga, the burden of proof is on the one who makes the claim

It's clear you don't know what "burden of proof" or "claim" mean. The internet is not a good place to learn rhetoric, friend.

Burden of proof falls on the person who claims X to exist, not on the person who denies X's existence. If it exists, it should be demonstrable. If it's demonstrable, why don't you go ahead and prove user wrong with evidence that "much of [Scandinavian licorice] isn't [made without added flavourings]." Providing even three examples of Scandinavian-made licorice brands whose ingredients list doesn't include 'added flavourings' would prove the claim.

The reason the burden of proof lies on the one claiming something exists can be extrapolated from the following:

I could deny the existence of a lonely hobgoblin with a magic hat and you could argue that he does exist.
Since there's no way for me to gather evidence to prove his non-existence, the absence of that evidence implies his non-existence and it is therefore reasonable to assume he does not, in fact, exist.
However, because the theoretical 'you' claims that he does exist, it's then your job to provide evidence of his existence. If he does exist, their evidence would be demonstrable.

It's simply Russell's teapot, but along a much, much sillier narrative involving licorice and Germanic faerie creatures.

>Burden of proof falls on the person who claims X to exist
Exactly. The burden of proof falls on the one who claims that aniseed exists in Scandinavian licorice, to a large extent.

What is a meme vegetable?
Fennel doesn't taste overly sweet to me compared to other vegetables.

>"you're wrong!!!"
>then prove me wrong.
>"no, you prove ME wrong!!!
>you mean... you're challenging me to prove your claim that i'm wrong wrong?
>"you're wrong!!!"
>that's not an argument. if i'm wrong, prove me wrong
>"no you have to prove me wrong!!!"
>i have to prove that you're saying i'm wrong is wrong?
>"YOU'RE WRONG!!!"
O... kay...
Were you fed radioactive oatmeal in the 50s or something?

You made the original claim, so the burden of proof is on you.
Why would the burden of proof be on me for challenging your claim?

Because he only learned about the concept of the burden of proof by reading shitty atheist literature re: the existence of god.

All this posturing and you still refuse to provide a single example of Scandinavian licorice that doesn't have added flavourings.
If you want to challenge a claim, you should provide evidence to back up your challenge. That's what I do. But you won't. Why? You could cut this silly argument between you and user pretty quickly if you did.

I guess you're right.

I don't have to back it up until sources are provided for the original claim.

I've chewed on the pure root, and it tastes very similar. There's no getting around it, brother.

Why should anyone take your challenge seriously if you won't back it up? Why won't you back it up? Is it because you can't? I think it's because you can't. You can't.

See

>never had licorice
I literally have licorice root in my pantry.
You're a moron who has no idea what you're talking about.

No one has to take the challenge seriously. But if you don't take the challenge seriously because it isn't backed up, then why would you take the original claim seriously if it isn't backed up?

>Why won't you back it up? Is it because you can't? I think it's because you can't. You can't.
Same thing can be said about the original claim.

No, fennel is great cooked with fish or in side dishes with fish.

So you can't prove user wrong? Then why are you arguing? Allow me to prove you wrong without even posting dozens of Swedish/Norwegian/Danish-language ingredients lists:

• pure licorice without additives is only mass manufactured in one country in the world which consumes over 99% of its production and that country is Italy
• Scandinavia is not in Italy nor Italy in Scandinavia
• ergo Scandinavia doesn't mass-manufacture licorice without added flavours.

>licorice = licorice root and they taste exactly the same
And paprika = red bell pepper and they taste exactly the same too, I guess.
Apply yourself, user.