Barbecue (alt.food.barbecue) Discuss barbecue and grilling--southern style "low and slow" smoking of ribs, shoulders and briskets, as well as direct heat grilling of everything from burgers to salmon to vegetables.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #41 (permalink)   Report Post  
Jack Curry
 
Posts: n/a
Default

This took me about 18 seconds to find, Kent. Now puleeze go argue with this
website, since it certainly contradicts your totally stupid statement.

Jack Curry
-Surprise! Kent remains a numbnuts-


http://www.free-definition.com/Smoking-(food).html
Smoking (food)
Definition, Meaning, Explanation
??????: ??



----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----

Smoking is the process of curing, cooking, or seasoning food by exposing it
for long periods of time to the smoke from a (usually wood) fire. "Hot
smoking" is typically a several-hours-long process that can be used to fully
cook raw meats or fish, while "cold smoking" is an hours- or days-long
process that is generally used to preserve or flavour foods (usually meats
or fish, but sometimes cheeses, vegetables, fruits, and even beer).

The fuel used for smoking may contain flavoring adjuncts. For example,
Chinese tea-smoking uses a mixture of uncooked rice, raw sugar, and tea,
heated at the base of a wok, to slowly smoke and flavor meat and other
foods. In Europe, the traditional wood burnt to smoke fish and meat is
alder, but oak is more often used now, and beech to a smaller extent. In
North America, hickory and mesquite wood, in addition to oak and alder, and
also sometimes wood from fruit trees such as cherry and plum, are commonly
used for smoking.

Historically, farms in the western world included a special small building
termed the smokehouse where meats could be smoked and stored. This was
generally well-separated from other buildings both because of the fire
danger and because of the smoke emanations.

See also: Food preservation, curing



  #48 (permalink)   Report Post  
Kent
 
Posts: n/a
Default

To suggest an internet dictionary definition as gospel is pretty damn
stupid. I don't really think you are stupid; however you are extremely
cerebrally constipated. It's time for you to have a special high colonic
cerebral enema; that may relieve you.

"Jack Curry" <Jack > wrote in message
...
> This took me about 18 seconds to find, Kent. Now puleeze go argue with
> this
> website, since it certainly contradicts your totally stupid statement.
>
> Jack Curry
> -Surprise! Kent remains a numbnuts-
>
>
> http://www.free-definition.com/Smoking-(food).html
> Smoking (food)
> Definition, Meaning, Explanation
> ??????: ??
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----
>
> Smoking is the process of curing, cooking, or seasoning food by exposing
> it
> for long periods of time to the smoke from a (usually wood) fire. "Hot
> smoking" is typically a several-hours-long process that can be used to
> fully
> cook raw meats or fish, while "cold smoking" is an hours- or days-long
> process that is generally used to preserve or flavour foods (usually meats
> or fish, but sometimes cheeses, vegetables, fruits, and even beer).
>
> The fuel used for smoking may contain flavoring adjuncts. For example,
> Chinese tea-smoking uses a mixture of uncooked rice, raw sugar, and tea,
> heated at the base of a wok, to slowly smoke and flavor meat and other
> foods. In Europe, the traditional wood burnt to smoke fish and meat is
> alder, but oak is more often used now, and beech to a smaller extent. In
> North America, hickory and mesquite wood, in addition to oak and alder,
> and
> also sometimes wood from fruit trees such as cherry and plum, are commonly
> used for smoking.
>
> Historically, farms in the western world included a special small building
> termed the smokehouse where meats could be smoked and stored. This was
> generally well-separated from other buildings both because of the fire
> danger and because of the smoke emanations.
>
> See also: Food preservation, curing
>
>
>



  #51 (permalink)   Report Post  
Kevin S. Wilson
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Fri, 17 Dec 2004 08:46:18 -0500, "Jack Curry" <Jack
> wrote:

>>
>> "Jack Curry" <Jack
> wrote in message
>> ...
>> > This took me about 18 seconds to find, Kent. Now puleeze go argue with
>> > this
>> > website, since it certainly contradicts your totally stupid statement.
>> >


>"Kent" > wrote in message
>news:Gdvwd.250625$HA.61105@attbi_s01...
>> To suggest an internet dictionary definition as gospel is pretty damn
>> stupid.


No one said it was "Gospel," Kent. That's you, putting words in Jack's
mouth.

Jack posted something that directly contradicts your assertion that
smoking isn't cooking. If you wish to debate the matter, it is now up
to you to refute what Jack posted, not merely question the authority
of Jack's source.

Your hand-waving fools no one, Kent. If you wish to prove Jack's
source as unathoratative, then you have to do so by referring to
authoritative sources. If you wish to prove that his assertion is
incorrect, you have to do so by proving your assertion is correct.

Most 7th-graders understand these basic concepts.

>> I don't really think you are stupid; however you are extremely
>> cerebrally constipated. It's time for you to have a special high colonic
>> cerebral enema; that may relieve you.


Time for some new material, Kent. You've cut-and-pasted that stuff so
often, the pixels are starting to fray around the edges.

>Rearranged and snipped because Kent is too dumb to understand how to be
>polite on a ng-
>
>Ahah! EVERYBODY else is WRONG. Except for Kent.


Is it time to say, "If a dozen people tell you you're an ass, maybe
it's time to get fitted for a saddle"?

>Um, Kent? Would you show
>me a source, any source that agrees with your asshead opinion about smoking?


There you go, Kent. This is what is known in The Industry as "put up
or shut up."

You can do it. If smoking isn't cooking, then there must be dozens of
sources that support that assertion. All Jack is asking is that you
post them. Anything else is just arguing from assertion, saying the
same thing over and over as if saying it enough times will make it
true.

>And would you tell us again about how we shouldn't brine a stuffed turkey
>because the stuffing will get soggy? That one was your best so far.


<snicker>

--
Kevin S. Wilson
Tech Writer at a university somewhere in Idaho
"When you can't do something completely impractical and intrinsically
useless *yourself*, you go get the Kibologists to do it for you." --J. Furr
  #52 (permalink)   Report Post  
Kevin S. Wilson
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Fri, 17 Dec 2004 08:46:18 -0500, "Jack Curry" <Jack
> wrote:

>>
>> "Jack Curry" <Jack
> wrote in message
>> ...
>> > This took me about 18 seconds to find, Kent. Now puleeze go argue with
>> > this
>> > website, since it certainly contradicts your totally stupid statement.
>> >


>"Kent" > wrote in message
>news:Gdvwd.250625$HA.61105@attbi_s01...
>> To suggest an internet dictionary definition as gospel is pretty damn
>> stupid.


No one said it was "Gospel," Kent. That's you, putting words in Jack's
mouth.

Jack posted something that directly contradicts your assertion that
smoking isn't cooking. If you wish to debate the matter, it is now up
to you to refute what Jack posted, not merely question the authority
of Jack's source.

Your hand-waving fools no one, Kent. If you wish to prove Jack's
source as unathoratative, then you have to do so by referring to
authoritative sources. If you wish to prove that his assertion is
incorrect, you have to do so by proving your assertion is correct.

Most 7th-graders understand these basic concepts.

>> I don't really think you are stupid; however you are extremely
>> cerebrally constipated. It's time for you to have a special high colonic
>> cerebral enema; that may relieve you.


Time for some new material, Kent. You've cut-and-pasted that stuff so
often, the pixels are starting to fray around the edges.

>Rearranged and snipped because Kent is too dumb to understand how to be
>polite on a ng-
>
>Ahah! EVERYBODY else is WRONG. Except for Kent.


Is it time to say, "If a dozen people tell you you're an ass, maybe
it's time to get fitted for a saddle"?

>Um, Kent? Would you show
>me a source, any source that agrees with your asshead opinion about smoking?


There you go, Kent. This is what is known in The Industry as "put up
or shut up."

You can do it. If smoking isn't cooking, then there must be dozens of
sources that support that assertion. All Jack is asking is that you
post them. Anything else is just arguing from assertion, saying the
same thing over and over as if saying it enough times will make it
true.

>And would you tell us again about how we shouldn't brine a stuffed turkey
>because the stuffing will get soggy? That one was your best so far.


<snicker>

--
Kevin S. Wilson
Tech Writer at a university somewhere in Idaho
"When you can't do something completely impractical and intrinsically
useless *yourself*, you go get the Kibologists to do it for you." --J. Furr
  #53 (permalink)   Report Post  
Kevin S. Wilson
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Fri, 17 Dec 2004 00:11:24 -0600, p0wd3r >
wrote:

>On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 16:30:42 -0700, Kevin S. Wilson >
>wrote:
>
>Nothing of substance.


Oh, look. An anonymous leet-speaking HaX0r d00d rears up on its hind
legs, emboldened by its discovery of the "X-NO-ARCHIVE" header.

Which morphing k00k would you be? Or is it just that Christmas break
came a bit early at your school, so now you have time to tell AFB
"ph342 m\/ 1337 sk1llz"?

PS: Your X-NO-ARCHIVE x-no-works. You even managed to screw that up.

--
Kevin S. Wilson
Tech Writer at a university somewhere in Idaho
"When you can't do something completely impractical and intrinsically
useless *yourself*, you go get the Kibologists to do it for you." --J. Furr
  #54 (permalink)   Report Post  
Kevin S. Wilson
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Fri, 17 Dec 2004 00:11:24 -0600, p0wd3r >
wrote:

>On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 16:30:42 -0700, Kevin S. Wilson >
>wrote:
>
>Nothing of substance.


Oh, look. An anonymous leet-speaking HaX0r d00d rears up on its hind
legs, emboldened by its discovery of the "X-NO-ARCHIVE" header.

Which morphing k00k would you be? Or is it just that Christmas break
came a bit early at your school, so now you have time to tell AFB
"ph342 m\/ 1337 sk1llz"?

PS: Your X-NO-ARCHIVE x-no-works. You even managed to screw that up.

--
Kevin S. Wilson
Tech Writer at a university somewhere in Idaho
"When you can't do something completely impractical and intrinsically
useless *yourself*, you go get the Kibologists to do it for you." --J. Furr
  #55 (permalink)   Report Post  
Jack Curry
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Kent,

I found this and knew you'd want to know about it. It's the latest in
brine/marinades, especially for smooked foods.

http://www.bestpethealth.com/rcProd1.asp?id=62&c=62

Jack Curry





  #56 (permalink)   Report Post  
Jack Curry
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Kent,

I found this and knew you'd want to know about it. It's the latest in
brine/marinades, especially for smooked foods.

http://www.bestpethealth.com/rcProd1.asp?id=62&c=62

Jack Curry



  #57 (permalink)   Report Post  
cl
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Kevin S. Wilson" > wrote in message
...
> On Fri, 17 Dec 2004 00:12:00 GMT, "cl" > wrote:>

We've already established that pattern-matching isn't your strong
> suit, Pro. Otherwise, you wouldn't have been repeatedly trolled into
> doing unnecessary homework to "prove" the falsity of "errors"
> purposely posted to trick you into doing unnecessary homework (cf.
> "Request for Consideration").




There wasn't anything that was required of me to recite the RFCs and
meanings, it was off the cuff. Kinda like you talking about food.. Since
your a little slow I might spell out the fact that I have wee presence in
software industry and have authored my shared of servers and services.


> >Well hell, you are senor semantic/ speel flamer. Who are you to be

talking
> >Prof.

> Ducking the question doesn't make it go away, Pro. What in the
> blue-eyed froggy world would make you think I'm a professor? Is this
> yet another example of you getting your facts wrong?


Never once thought you were(or cared). That is the role you like to take on
the NGs ESPECIALLY when it comes to english comp. I'm sorry if you were
hoping for more.

-CAL


  #58 (permalink)   Report Post  
cl
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Kevin S. Wilson" > wrote in message
...
> On Fri, 17 Dec 2004 00:12:00 GMT, "cl" > wrote:>

We've already established that pattern-matching isn't your strong
> suit, Pro. Otherwise, you wouldn't have been repeatedly trolled into
> doing unnecessary homework to "prove" the falsity of "errors"
> purposely posted to trick you into doing unnecessary homework (cf.
> "Request for Consideration").




There wasn't anything that was required of me to recite the RFCs and
meanings, it was off the cuff. Kinda like you talking about food.. Since
your a little slow I might spell out the fact that I have wee presence in
software industry and have authored my shared of servers and services.


> >Well hell, you are senor semantic/ speel flamer. Who are you to be

talking
> >Prof.

> Ducking the question doesn't make it go away, Pro. What in the
> blue-eyed froggy world would make you think I'm a professor? Is this
> yet another example of you getting your facts wrong?


Never once thought you were(or cared). That is the role you like to take on
the NGs ESPECIALLY when it comes to english comp. I'm sorry if you were
hoping for more.

-CAL


  #59 (permalink)   Report Post  
Kevin S. Wilson
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Fri, 17 Dec 2004 19:57:25 GMT, "cl" > wrote:

>
>"Kevin S. Wilson" > wrote in message
.. .
>> On Fri, 17 Dec 2004 00:12:00 GMT, "cl" > wrote:>

>We've already established that pattern-matching isn't your strong
>> suit, Pro. Otherwise, you wouldn't have been repeatedly trolled into
>> doing unnecessary homework to "prove" the falsity of "errors"
>> purposely posted to trick you into doing unnecessary homework (cf.
>> "Request for Consideration").

>
>There wasn't anything that was required of me to recite the RFCs and
>meanings,


You still don't geddit, do you? We're not talking about the amount of
effort you put forth to correct my "error"; we're talking about WHY
you felt compelled to correct my "error" -- you just couldn't pass up
the chance to show off your GIANT BRANE, even though a small voice in
your head was probably saying, "Gee, CAL, maybe he's just messing with
your head."

On a side note, we're also talking about the fact that EVERYONE else
recognized what was posted as obvious nonsense, posted with the sole
intention of tricking you into responding in all seriousness to what
was, in essence, a joke.

Another words, YHBT. Why do you continue to act like such a whiny
prat about it? Are you so without a sense of humor that you can't even
admit that you fell for a practical joke?

> it was off the cuff. Kinda like you talking about food..


"Off the cuff" would seem to mean that you're some kind of expert
about Requests for Consideration and can speak knowledgeably and
extemporaenously about them and associated subjects. Thanks for saying
that I can do the same about food.

> Since
>your a little slow I might spell out the fact that I have wee presence in


"Wee presence"? What are you, a freakin' leprechaun?

>software industry and have authored my shared of servers and services.


Are we going to have to begin comparing SAT scores now?
>
>> >Well hell, you are senor semantic/ speel flamer. Who are you to be

>talking
>> >Prof.

>> Ducking the question doesn't make it go away, Pro. What in the
>> blue-eyed froggy world would make you think I'm a professor? Is this
>> yet another example of you getting your facts wrong?

>
>Never once thought you were(or cared). That is the role you like to take on
>the NGs ESPECIALLY when it comes to english comp. I'm sorry if you were
>hoping for more.


Another words, you once again failed to get your facts straight, and
when called on it, you insist that by calling me "Professor" you
didn't really mean that I was a professor. That about right? You have
a bad habit of circling back to say that your words don't mean what
they appear to say, simply because you now say they mean something
different.

I think it might be best if you go back to calling people fat, Pro.
You're not very good at this more subtle stuff.

--
Kevin S. Wilson
Tech Writer at a university somewhere in Idaho
"When you can't do something completely impractical and intrinsically
useless *yourself*, you go get the Kibologists to do it for you." --J. Furr
  #60 (permalink)   Report Post  
Kevin S. Wilson
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Fri, 17 Dec 2004 19:57:25 GMT, "cl" > wrote:

>
>"Kevin S. Wilson" > wrote in message
.. .
>> On Fri, 17 Dec 2004 00:12:00 GMT, "cl" > wrote:>

>We've already established that pattern-matching isn't your strong
>> suit, Pro. Otherwise, you wouldn't have been repeatedly trolled into
>> doing unnecessary homework to "prove" the falsity of "errors"
>> purposely posted to trick you into doing unnecessary homework (cf.
>> "Request for Consideration").

>
>There wasn't anything that was required of me to recite the RFCs and
>meanings,


You still don't geddit, do you? We're not talking about the amount of
effort you put forth to correct my "error"; we're talking about WHY
you felt compelled to correct my "error" -- you just couldn't pass up
the chance to show off your GIANT BRANE, even though a small voice in
your head was probably saying, "Gee, CAL, maybe he's just messing with
your head."

On a side note, we're also talking about the fact that EVERYONE else
recognized what was posted as obvious nonsense, posted with the sole
intention of tricking you into responding in all seriousness to what
was, in essence, a joke.

Another words, YHBT. Why do you continue to act like such a whiny
prat about it? Are you so without a sense of humor that you can't even
admit that you fell for a practical joke?

> it was off the cuff. Kinda like you talking about food..


"Off the cuff" would seem to mean that you're some kind of expert
about Requests for Consideration and can speak knowledgeably and
extemporaenously about them and associated subjects. Thanks for saying
that I can do the same about food.

> Since
>your a little slow I might spell out the fact that I have wee presence in


"Wee presence"? What are you, a freakin' leprechaun?

>software industry and have authored my shared of servers and services.


Are we going to have to begin comparing SAT scores now?
>
>> >Well hell, you are senor semantic/ speel flamer. Who are you to be

>talking
>> >Prof.

>> Ducking the question doesn't make it go away, Pro. What in the
>> blue-eyed froggy world would make you think I'm a professor? Is this
>> yet another example of you getting your facts wrong?

>
>Never once thought you were(or cared). That is the role you like to take on
>the NGs ESPECIALLY when it comes to english comp. I'm sorry if you were
>hoping for more.


Another words, you once again failed to get your facts straight, and
when called on it, you insist that by calling me "Professor" you
didn't really mean that I was a professor. That about right? You have
a bad habit of circling back to say that your words don't mean what
they appear to say, simply because you now say they mean something
different.

I think it might be best if you go back to calling people fat, Pro.
You're not very good at this more subtle stuff.

--
Kevin S. Wilson
Tech Writer at a university somewhere in Idaho
"When you can't do something completely impractical and intrinsically
useless *yourself*, you go get the Kibologists to do it for you." --J. Furr


  #61 (permalink)   Report Post  
Kevin S. Wilson
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Fri, 17 Dec 2004 15:08:06 -0600, p0wder
> wrote:

>On Fri, 17 Dec 2004 10:55:18 -0700, Kevin S. Wilson >
>wrote:
>
>>PS: Your X-NO-ARCHIVE x-no-works. You even managed to screw that up.

>
>MmmmmHmmmm. Google tHAT, Bitch.
>
>Oh,hahah!


It never fails: Those most eager to hide behing X-NO-ARCHIVES are
also the ones with the very least to say.

--
Kevin S. Wilson
Tech Writer at a university somewhere in Idaho
"When you can't do something completely impractical and intrinsically
useless *yourself*, you go get the Kibologists to do it for you." --J. Furr
  #62 (permalink)   Report Post  
Kevin S. Wilson
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Fri, 17 Dec 2004 15:08:06 -0600, p0wder
> wrote:

>On Fri, 17 Dec 2004 10:55:18 -0700, Kevin S. Wilson >
>wrote:
>
>>PS: Your X-NO-ARCHIVE x-no-works. You even managed to screw that up.

>
>MmmmmHmmmm. Google tHAT, Bitch.
>
>Oh,hahah!


It never fails: Those most eager to hide behing X-NO-ARCHIVES are
also the ones with the very least to say.

--
Kevin S. Wilson
Tech Writer at a university somewhere in Idaho
"When you can't do something completely impractical and intrinsically
useless *yourself*, you go get the Kibologists to do it for you." --J. Furr
  #70 (permalink)   Report Post  
Duwop
 
Posts: n/a
Default

> wrote in message
> >

> Gee. I miss Kevvie's occasional worthwhile, on-topic posts


Do you really? Naaaaah!





  #71 (permalink)   Report Post  
Duwop
 
Posts: n/a
Default

> wrote in message
> >

> Gee. I miss Kevvie's occasional worthwhile, on-topic posts


Do you really? Naaaaah!



  #72 (permalink)   Report Post  
Kent
 
Posts: n/a
Default

At the risk of acting like Instructor Wilson I would say that even a high
colonic irrigation won't help you.
However, I will continue to look for something that may help, and I will
forward that to your provider.
Happy ........... to you and all
Kent

"Jack Curry" <Jack > wrote in message
...
> Kent,
>
> I found this and knew you'd want to know about it. It's the latest in
> brine/marinades, especially for smooked foods.
>
>
http://www.bestpethealth.com/rcProd1.asp?id=62&c=62
>
> Jack Curry
>
>
>



  #73 (permalink)   Report Post  
Kent
 
Posts: n/a
Default

At the risk of acting like Instructor Wilson I would say that even a high
colonic irrigation won't help you.
However, I will continue to look for something that may help, and I will
forward that to your provider.
Happy ........... to you and all
Kent

"Jack Curry" <Jack > wrote in message
...
> Kent,
>
> I found this and knew you'd want to know about it. It's the latest in
> brine/marinades, especially for smooked foods.
>
>
http://www.bestpethealth.com/rcProd1.asp?id=62&c=62
>
> Jack Curry
>
>
>



  #74 (permalink)   Report Post  
Kent
 
Posts: n/a
Default

From the flamer to the troller, or another flamer, what does "smooked"
mean??? You needn't answer.

"Jack Curry" <Jack > wrote in message
...
> Kent,
>
> I found this and knew you'd want to know about it. It's the latest in
> brine/marinades, especially for smooked foods.
>
>
http://www.bestpethealth.com/rcProd1.asp?id=62&c=62
>
> Jack Curry
>
>
>



  #75 (permalink)   Report Post  
Jack Curry
 
Posts: n/a
Default


> "Jack Curry" <Jack > wrote in message
> ...
> > Kent,
> >
> > I found this and knew you'd want to know about it. It's the latest in
> > brine/marinades, especially for smooked foods.
> >
> >
http://www.bestpethealth.com/rcProd1.asp?id=62&c=62
> >
> > Jack Curry
> >

Again, Kent's top-post rearranged because he *still* doesn't understand
context or courtesy -


"Kent" > wrote in message
news:hJ9xd.218491$V41.152487@attbi_s52...
> From the flamer to the troller, or another flamer, what does "smooked"
> mean??? You needn't answer.
>


Why Kent, I thought you of *all* people would embrace the term "SMOOKED."

C'mon, Kent. You know.

Tell us again about how brining a turkey makes the stuffing soggy. It's my
favorite Kent story.

Jack Curry
<snork>




  #76 (permalink)   Report Post  
cl
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Kevin S. Wilson" > wrote in message
...

> Most 7th-graders understand these basic concepts.


Once again you are trying to project yourself above others. Are you
oblivious to that?


> >Ahah! EVERYBODY else is WRONG. Except for Kent.



Now that wouldn't be everyone. You seem to have a psychosis that gives you
the belief that the world is standing in line behind Kevin. No, that would
just be Jack and Kevin's ass.



> Is it time to say, "If a dozen people tell you you're an ass, maybe
> it's time to get fitted for a saddle"?


Glad to see you finally have self realization.


> >Um, Kent? Would you show
> >me a source, any source that agrees with your asshead opinion about

smoking?
>
> There you go, Kent. This is what is known in The Industry as "put up
> or shut up."



So what is Prof. Kevin's definition of cooking? You will probably puss out
and not give one but I still had to ask.

-CAL


  #77 (permalink)   Report Post  
cl
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Kevin S. Wilson" > wrote in message
...

> Most 7th-graders understand these basic concepts.


Once again you are trying to project yourself above others. Are you
oblivious to that?


> >Ahah! EVERYBODY else is WRONG. Except for Kent.



Now that wouldn't be everyone. You seem to have a psychosis that gives you
the belief that the world is standing in line behind Kevin. No, that would
just be Jack and Kevin's ass.



> Is it time to say, "If a dozen people tell you you're an ass, maybe
> it's time to get fitted for a saddle"?


Glad to see you finally have self realization.


> >Um, Kent? Would you show
> >me a source, any source that agrees with your asshead opinion about

smoking?
>
> There you go, Kent. This is what is known in The Industry as "put up
> or shut up."



So what is Prof. Kevin's definition of cooking? You will probably puss out
and not give one but I still had to ask.

-CAL


  #78 (permalink)   Report Post  
cl
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Kevin S. Wilson" > wrote in message
...
> On Fri, 17 Dec 2004 00:11:24 -0600, p0wd3r >
> wrote:
>
> >On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 16:30:42 -0700, Kevin S. Wilson >
> >wrote:
> >
> >Nothing of substance.

>
> Oh, look. An anonymous leet-speaking HaX0r d00d rears up on its hind
> legs, emboldened by its discovery of the "X-NO-ARCHIVE" header.
>
> Which morphing k00k would you be? Or is it just that Christmas break
> came a bit early at your school, so now you have time to tell AFB
> "ph342 m\/ 1337 sk1llz"?
>
> PS: Your X-NO-ARCHIVE x-no-works. You even managed to screw that up.


What are you a stalker? How would you have discovered the headers
effectiveness if you didn't just decide to google everything on powder?

Your new title: Prof. Keving 'Stalker' Wilsom 33rd degree mason Esq.


  #79 (permalink)   Report Post  
Kevin S. Wilson
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Sun, 19 Dec 2004 16:05:17 GMT, "cl" > wrote:

>What are you a stalker? How would you have discovered the headers
>effectiveness if you didn't just decide to google everything on powder?


^^^^^^

You misspelled "my new sock-puppet."

--
Kevin S. Wilson
Tech Writer at a university somewhere in Idaho
"When you can't do something completely impractical and intrinsically
useless *yourself*, you go get the Kibologists to do it for you." --J. Furr
  #80 (permalink)   Report Post  
Kevin S. Wilson
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Sun, 19 Dec 2004 16:02:41 GMT, "cl" > wrote:

<all of this stuff left in to show that CAL can't even get the
attributions right, and so ends up arguing with me about things I
never said.>
>
>"Kevin S. Wilson" > wrote in message
.. .
>
>> Most 7th-graders understand these basic concepts.

>
>Once again you are trying to project yourself above others. Are you
>oblivious to that?
>
>
>> >Ahah! EVERYBODY else is WRONG. Except for Kent.

>
>
>Now that wouldn't be everyone. You seem to have a psychosis that gives you
>the belief that the world is standing in line behind Kevin. No, that would
>just be Jack and Kevin's ass.
>
>> Is it time to say, "If a dozen people tell you you're an ass, maybe
>> it's time to get fitted for a saddle"?

>
>Glad to see you finally have self realization.
>
>
>> >Um, Kent? Would you show
>> >me a source, any source that agrees with your asshead opinion about

>smoking?
>>
>> There you go, Kent. This is what is known in The Industry as "put up
>> or shut up."

>
>
>So what is Prof. Kevin's definition of cooking? You will probably puss out
>and not give one but I still had to ask.


Um, no, you didn't have to ask, unless someone has a gun to your head
and is telling you what to post to Usenet.

I didn't make the assertion that smoking isn't cooking. Therefore, it
is not up to me to provide the definition that would prove or disprove
the assertion. It is up to Kent to prove his assertion--or maybe you'd
like to have a go at it?

All of that was explained, BTW, in the parts of my post that you
snipped. You did read those parts before replying, right?

--
Kevin S. Wilson
Tech Writer at a university somewhere in Idaho
"When you can't do something completely impractical and intrinsically
useless *yourself*, you go get the Kibologists to do it for you." --J. Furr
Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Smoked Salmon - what to do with it? Melba's Jammin' General Cooking 45 30-07-2010 05:40 PM
Smoked Salmon War[_3_] Barbecue 3 05-05-2010 01:18 AM
smoked salmon Gil Faver Barbecue 8 08-04-2008 08:15 PM
Smoked salmon: croft smoked. Oz General Cooking 3 24-10-2003 08:03 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:40 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 FoodBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Food and drink"