Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
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 | Display Modes |
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|||
> wrote in message
> "Jack Curry" <Jack > wrote: > Jack, I really have to wonder why you even bother rising to the bait? My > life is so much quieter since I started killfiling these idiots. Try it. > You'll like it! Kent's too amusing, those other two aren't. I've plonked plenty (and suspect some have returned the favor) , but I'll never plonk our native Saint of Warm Brining, too many laughs. |
|
|||
|
|||
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 > > > |
|
|||
|
|||
>
> "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- > > "Kent" > wrote in message news:Gdvwd.250625$HA.61105@attbi_s01... > To suggest an internet dictionary definition as gospel is pretty damn > stupid. I don't really think you are stupid; however you are extremely > cerebrally constipated. It's time for you to have a special high colonic > cerebral enema; that may relieve you. Rearranged and snipped because Kent is too dumb to understand how to be polite on a ng- Ahah! EVERYBODY else is WRONG. Except for Kent. Um, Kent? Would you show me a source, any source that agrees with your asshead opinion about smoking? And would you tell us again about how we shouldn't brine a stuffed turkey because the stuffing will get soggy? That one was your best so far. Jack Curry -You are *so* much fun- |
|
|||
|
|||
>
> "Jack Curry" <Jack > wrote in message > ... > > This took me about 18 seconds to find, Kent. Now puleeze go argue with > > this > > website, since it certainly contradicts your totally stupid statement. > > > > Jack Curry > > -Surprise! Kent remains a numbnuts- > > "Kent" > wrote in message news:Gdvwd.250625$HA.61105@attbi_s01... > 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. 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. Um, Kent? Would you show me a source, any source that agrees with your asshead opinion about smoking? 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. Jack Curry -You are *so* much fun- |
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
|
|||
|
|||
"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 |
|
|||
|
|||
"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 |
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|||
Ljutefisk Geist wrote:
> In article >, > says... > > >>>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. >> >>Boooofkinhooohoohoo. > > > Come into MY hood and say that, whitey! > Why does it always have to be about race? What are you, an anti-semite? |
|
|||
|
|||
Ljutefisk Geist wrote:
> In article >, > says... > > >>>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. >> >>Boooofkinhooohoohoo. > > > Come into MY hood and say that, whitey! > Why does it always have to be about race? What are you, an anti-semite? |
|
|||
|
|||
In article <gJJwd.588428$D%.193464@attbi_s51>,
says... > Ljutefisk Geist wrote: > > In article >, > > says... > > > > > >>>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. > >> > >>Boooofkinhooohoohoo. > > > > > > Come into MY hood and say that, whitey! > > > > Why does it always have to be about race? What are you, > an anti-semite? No, I'm a semi-hittite. |
|
|||
|
|||
> wrote in message
> > > Gee. I miss Kevvie's occasional worthwhile, on-topic posts Do you really? Naaaaah! |
|
|||
|
|||
> wrote in message
> > > Gee. I miss Kevvie's occasional worthwhile, on-topic posts Do you really? Naaaaah! |
|
|||
|
|||
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 > > > |
|
|||
|
|||
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 > > > |
|
|||
|
|||
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 > > > |
|
|||
|
|||
> "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> |
|
|||
|
|||
"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 |
|
|||
|
|||
"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 |
|
|||
|
|||
"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. |
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Smoked Salmon - what to do with it? | General Cooking | |||
Smoked Salmon | Barbecue | |||
smoked salmon | Barbecue | |||
Smoked salmon: croft smoked. | General Cooking |