Musashi wrote:

> "Dan Logcher" > wrote in message ...
>
>>Musashi wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"Dan Logcher" > wrote in message ...
>>>
>>>
>>>>Musashi wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>"Dan Logcher" > wrote in message ...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Musashi wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Every source I've looked at indicates that Monkfish/Goosefish do not have scales.
>>>>>>>Instead they have slime over skin for protection.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>So they're ugly and slimey.. man, they got the short end of the stick.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>Yes. It's quite remarkable that nature provided this fish with all this
>>>>>"yuckyness" as a defense, and yet Humans still managed to discover that they are tasty.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>I'll bet it was first eaten on a dare.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>Like the first oyster?
>>>
>>I find oyster a lot nicer looking than monkfish. Oysters don't look like
>>they'd eat you if they had the chance.
>
> Don't know about "nicer" but certainly more passive.
> Especially once you get past the shell.

We wouldn't be eating coconuts if shell was an issue.

Seagulls can be great teachers. I used to watch them
drop crabs and shellfish on the rocks in Maine. They made
quick work of them leaving broken shells and guts behind.

--
Dan