"Goomba" > wrote in message
...
> Lass Chance_2 wrote:
>> Oooops! I thought there was a D in it, too!
>>
>> I have...MANY times, I guess, spelled it, "refridgerator".
>>
>> oh geeeeze. Thanks. Color me....embarrassed.
>>
>> Lass
>>
>
> A lot of folks can't seem to recall it is spelled congratulations instead
> of congradulations. And too many people think "alot" is one word.

I don't know where you hang out but I'm glad I'm not there.

"Goomba" > wrote in message
> A lot of folks can't seem to recall it is spelled congratulations instead
> of congradulations. And too many people think "alot" is one word.

Alot of people do, but I keep them in the backround so it is a mute point.

In article >, "Nancy Young" > wrote:
>Charlene Charette wrote:
>> Steve Wertz wrote:
>>> On 12 May 2007 17:25:15 -0700, wrote:
>>>
>>>> There is no d in refrigerate.
>>>
>>> But there is in 'fridge'. Go figure.
>
>> That's because "fridge" comes from "Frigidaire" not "refrigerator".
>
>And if you spell it "frig" it doesn't look as if it's pronounced "fridge".

And it would sound rude too. :-)

Cheers, Phred.

--
LID

Sqwertz wrote:
> Charlene Charette wrote:
> > Sqwertz wrote:
>
> >>>There is no d in refrigerate.
>
> >> But there is in 'fridge'. *Go figure.
>
> > That's because "fridge" comes from "Frigidaire" not "refrigerator".
>
> So why is it called a "RE-frigerator", and not just "frigerator"?
> Frigerator would mean "makes cold" (in the modern sense of the
> language), so why the "re" in front of it?
>
> No wonder they English is the hardest language to learn. *It
> doesn't make any sense.

Nothing whackier that the two stooges discussing academics.

Anyone who passed 4th grade science would be capable of comprehending
the concept that a refrigerant does not make anything cold... a
refrigerant removes heat... as does a refrigerator. Cold is merely
the absense of heat. The "re" indicates the *return* to the natural
state.

Sheldon

Sheldon wrote:

Sqwertz wrote:
> Charlene Charette wrote:
> > Sqwertz wrote:
>
>> >>>There is no d in refrigerate.
>
>> >> But there is in 'fridge'. Go figure.
>
>> > That's because "fridge" comes from "Frigidaire" not "refrigerator".
>
>> So why is it called a "RE-frigerator", and not just "frigerator"?
>> Frigerator would mean "makes cold" (in the modern sense of the
>> language), so why the "re" in front of it?
>
>> No wonder they English is the hardest language to learn. It
..>> doesn't make any sense.

>Nothing whackier that the two stooges discussing >academics.

>Anyone who passed 4th grade science would be capable of comprehending
>the concept that a refrigerant does not make anything cold... a
>refrigerant removes heat... as does a refrigerator. Cold is merely
>the absense of heat. The "re" indicates the *return* to the natural
>state.


Hey, poor sqwirtz is just all agog from trying to find a fridge big enuf to
hold those meezly 3/4 lbs. of shrimp he prepares for six people...give 'im a
break, lol.

--
Best
Greg

On May 17, 10:46�am, "Gregory Morrow" >
wrote:
> Sheldon wrote:
> Sqwertz wrote:
> > Charlene Charette wrote:
> > > Sqwertz wrote:
>
> >> >>>There is no d in refrigerate.
>
> >> >> But there is in 'fridge'. Go figure.
>
> >> > That's because "fridge" comes from "Frigidaire" not "refrigerator".
>
> >> So why is it called a "RE-frigerator", and not just "frigerator"?
> >> Frigerator would mean "makes cold" (in the modern sense of the
> >> language), so why the "re" in front of it?
>
> >> No wonder they English is the hardest language to learn. It
>
> .>> doesn't make any sense.
>
> >Nothing whackier that the two stooges discussing >academics.
> >Anyone who passed 4th grade science would be capable of comprehending
> >the concept that a refrigerant does not make anything cold... a
> >refrigerant removes heat... as does a refrigerator. *Cold is merely
> >the absense of heat. *The "re" indicates the *return* to the natural
> >state.
>
> Hey, poor sqwirtz is just all agog from trying to find a fridge big enuf to
> hold those meezly 3/4 lbs. of shrimp he prepares for six people...give 'im a
> break, lol.

Yep, 12 whole ounces of raw shrimp ends up as 8 ounces cooked... just
enough for six to fill a cavity each in one molar. Eight ounces of
cooked shrimp is like feeding 6 people one can of tuna... my six cats
can devour two ounces of shrimp each and be looking for refills.

Twelve ounces raw shrimp is a kinda shrimpy snack for two average
adults... actually it's a tease, and an embarrassment... folks will
have to count each bite so there's an even amount to go around... of
course they'd only need to be able to count up to three. Do you think
anyone hangs with the Sqwertz can count that high. I would allow more
than 3/4 pound of shrimp for those two kids... 3/4 lb of raw shrimp is
a just right appetizer for one adult, especially when the entire menu
is just unsubstantial snack food.

Sheldon

Sheldon wrote:

> On May 17, 10:46?am, "Gregory Morrow" >
> wrote:
> > Sheldon wrote:
> > Sqwertz wrote:
> > > Charlene Charette wrote:
> > > > Sqwertz wrote:
>
> > >> >>>There is no d in refrigerate.
>
> > >> >> But there is in 'fridge'. Go figure.
>
> > >> > That's because "fridge" comes from "Frigidaire" not "refrigerator".
>
> > >> So why is it called a "RE-frigerator", and not just "frigerator"?
> > >> Frigerator would mean "makes cold" (in the modern sense of the
> > >> language), so why the "re" in front of it?
>
> > >> No wonder they English is the hardest language to learn. It
>
> > .>> doesn't make any sense.
>
> > >Nothing whackier that the two stooges discussing >academics.
> > >Anyone who passed 4th grade science would be capable of comprehending
> > >the concept that a refrigerant does not make anything cold... a
> > >refrigerant removes heat... as does a refrigerator. ?Cold is merely
> > >the absense of heat. ?The "re" indicates the *return* to the natural
> > >state.
>
> > Hey, poor sqwirtz is just all agog from trying to find a fridge big enuf to
> > hold those meezly 3/4 lbs. of shrimp he prepares for six people...give 'im a
> > break, lol.
>
> Yep, 12 whole ounces of raw shrimp ends up as 8 ounces cooked... just
> enough for six to fill a cavity each in one molar. Eight ounces of
> cooked shrimp is like feeding 6 people one can of tuna... my six cats
> can devour two ounces of shrimp each and be looking for refills.
>
> Twelve ounces raw shrimp is a kinda shrimpy snack for two average
> adults... actually it's a tease, and an embarrassment... folks will
> have to count each bite so there's an even amount to go around... of
> course they'd only need to be able to count up to three. Do you think
> anyone hangs with the Sqwertz can count that high. I would allow more
> than 3/4 pound of shrimp for those two kids... 3/4 lb of raw shrimp is
> a just right appetizer for one adult, especially when the entire menu
> is just unsubstantial snack food.


Sqwuirtz serves a "Pipi Platter" instead of a "Pupu Platter", lol...

Seriously, when I have two - three folks for dinner and I have shrimp
as an app, I never fiddle with less than a coupla pounds, anything
less is an insult, and we always have at least two apps, sometimes
more. Folks know to come to my place HUNGRY, if you go to Squirtz'
pad you'd have to fill up on slop at the Olde Kuntry Boo - fay
beforehand...

And when my guests depart they are sent off with copious leftovers
too, Squirtz sends his guests off with an ole Cheeze Doodle he found
hidden under the couch cushions...ONE Cheeze Doodle.

--
Best
Greg

Steve Wertz wrote:
> Sheldon wrote:
>
> > Yep, 12 whole ounces of raw shrimp ends up as 8 ounces cooked...
>
> More bullshit. Shrimp cooked for 1 minute does not loose 33% of
> it's weight. Where do you come up with this shit?

Sure it does... in fact raw shelled shrimp weeps about 20pct of it's
weight just sitting in the fridge for 24 hours... and when tossed into
the deep fryer just what do you think all that bubbling is about. And
unless it's pretty small shrimp it's gonna need more than a minute to
cook, and the smaller the shrimp the more moisture is lost. Face it,
you're just too miserly to buy normal amounts of food.

ost writes:
>On Mon, 14 May 2007 02:52:02 -0500, Charlene Charette wrote:
>
>> Steve Wertz wrote:
>>> On 12 May 2007 17:25:15 -0700, wrote:
>>>
>>>>There is no d in refrigerate.
>>>
>>> But there is in 'fridge'. Go figure.
>>
>> That's because "fridge" comes from "Frigidaire" not "refrigerator".
>
>So why is it called a "RE-frigerator", and not just "frigerator"?
>Frigerator would mean "makes cold" (in the modern sense of the
>language), so why the "re" in front of it?

making something cold is different from keeping something cold

In article >, ost
says...
> On Thu, 17 May 2007 16:27:56 +0000 (UTC), tert in seattle wrote:
>
> > ost writes:
> >
> >>So why is it called a "RE-frigerator", and not just "frigerator"?
> >>Frigerator would mean "makes cold" (in the modern sense of the
> >>language), so why the "re" in front of it?
> >
> > making something cold is different from keeping something cold
>
> But most (all?) things that go into the frigerator were not cold
> to begin with, so it's not returning to a cold state.
>
> -sw
>

I am astonished at the blinding stupidity in this thread. Don't you
blockheads know what a dictionary is?



--
Peter Aitken

writes:

>I am astonished at the blinding stupidity in this thread. Don't you
>blockheads know what a dictionary is?

no -- is there some kind of book that might tell us?

ost writes:
>On Thu, 17 May 2007 16:27:56 +0000 (UTC), tert in seattle wrote:
>
>> ost writes:
>>
>>>So why is it called a "RE-frigerator", and not just "frigerator"?
>>>Frigerator would mean "makes cold" (in the modern sense of the
>>>language), so why the "re" in front of it?
>>
>> making something cold is different from keeping something cold
>
>But most (all?) things that go into the frigerator were not cold
>to begin with, so it's not returning to a cold state.

If all you needed was to make things cold but not keep them
cold you could have a very small refrigerator.