Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Evolution WRONG About Origins of Chicken

3 views
Skip to first unread message

Loirbaj

unread,
Oct 17, 2011, 3:55:00 PM10/17/11
to
Charles Darwin claimed that the domesticated
chicken derives from the red jungle fowl, but new
research now shows that the wild origins of the
chicken trace instead to the gray jungle fowl.
Darwin, while never doing any actual science of
his own, had cadged information from breeders.
His confident claims of 'chicken evolution' now
crumble into dust, with the rest of his 'Theories.

Davej

unread,
Oct 17, 2011, 4:17:07 PM10/17/11
to
On Oct 17, 1:55 pm, Loirbaj <Rhodi...@wmconnect.com> wrote:
> Charles Darwin claimed that the domesticated
> chicken derives from the red jungle fowl, but new
> research now shows that the wild origins of the
> chicken trace instead to the gray jungle fowl.

More jibbering. When you shake your head do the rocks inside rattle?

Why don't you become a Muslim and get fitted for an explosive vest?
You'd be able to pray seventeen times a day in a very public manner
just like the hypocrites.

As anyone can guess Darwin didn't have the genetic tests that are now
available to aid researchers.

sbalneav

unread,
Oct 17, 2011, 5:11:52 PM10/17/11
to
On 11-10-17 02:55 PM, Loirbaj wrote:
> Charles Darwin claimed that the domesticated
> chicken derives from the red jungle fowl, but new
> research now shows that the wild origins of the
> chicken trace instead to the gray jungle fowl.

Red or grey, if you shove a beer can up their heiney,
coat 'em in a mixture of Italian seasoning, onion powder,
garlic powder, salt, and a bit of cayenne pepper, and put
'em over indirect heat on the BBQ for about 1-3/4 hours,
they're DELICIOUS. For best results, add corn on the cob,
and home-made biscuits! Beer also accompanies this meal
well. For dessert: apple pie & French vanilla ice-cream.

YUM!

Christopher A. Lee

unread,
Oct 17, 2011, 5:23:34 PM10/17/11
to
On Mon, 17 Oct 2011 16:11:52 -0500, sbalneav <sbal...@alburg.net>
wrote:

>On 11-10-17 02:55 PM, Loirbaj wrote:
>> Charles Darwin claimed that the domesticated
>> chicken derives from the red jungle fowl, but new
>> research now shows that the wild origins of the
>> chicken trace instead to the gray jungle fowl.

So?

Except that he didn't "claim" this, if he said anything about it, it
was theorising and only narrowly missed the mark.

DNA analysis has allowed us to confirm or correct this sort of thing.

What's wrong with the moron that he ignores more than 150 years of
research since Origin was published?

>Red or grey, if you shove a beer can up their heiney,
>coat 'em in a mixture of Italian seasoning, onion powder,
>garlic powder, salt, and a bit of cayenne pepper, and put
>'em over indirect heat on the BBQ for about 1-3/4 hours,
>they're DELICIOUS. For best results, add corn on the cob,
>and home-made biscuits! Beer also accompanies this meal
>well. For dessert: apple pie & French vanilla ice-cream.
>
>YUM!

I stuff them with chopped bacon, breadcrumbs and mixed Italian herbs
(plus egg and milk to bind it) and then pot roast them slowly with
tomato, onion and mushroom - plus my own secret: covered with orange
slices that disintegrate as it cooks, suffusing the meat with flavour.

Pot roasting keeps the meat moist and tender, and the orange,
vegetables and meat juice makes a unique and wonderful gravy.

Jeanne Douglas

unread,
Oct 17, 2011, 5:24:52 PM10/17/11
to
Nonsense.

JD

Uncle Vic

unread,
Oct 17, 2011, 6:33:10 PM10/17/11
to
Loirbaj <Rhod...@wmconnect.com> wrote in news:f166d08b-d50c-4e3b-9ab6-
228a4e...@g16g2000yqa.googlegroups.com:
Science constantly corrects itself. Your religion remains stagnant.

--
Uncle Vic

Visit my You Tube Channel!
http://www.youtube.com/user/Vicman6311?feature=mhee

Virgil

unread,
Oct 17, 2011, 6:34:13 PM10/17/11
to
In article
<f166d08b-d50c-4e3b...@g16g2000yqa.googlegroups.com>,
Loirbaj <Rhod...@wmconnect.com> wrote:

> Charles Darwin claimed that the domesticated
> chicken derives from the red jungle fowl, but new
> research now shows that the wild origins of the
> chicken trace instead to the gray jungle fowl.

So that, day by day, Evolution becomes more certain!
--


SkyEyes

unread,
Oct 17, 2011, 7:32:31 PM10/17/11
to
I'm comin' to *your* house for dinner. What time do we eat?

Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34
BAAWA Knight of the Golden Litterbox
EAC Professor of Feline Thermometrics and Cat-Herding
skyeyes nine at cox dot net OR
skyeyes nine at yahoo dot com

Darwin123

unread,
Oct 17, 2011, 7:34:06 PM10/17/11
to
On Oct 17, 3:55 pm, Loirbaj <Rhodi...@wmconnect.com> wrote:
You still haven't acknowledged your mistake. Marine mammals
never lost their ability to drink fresh water. Therefore, the answer
to your rhetorical question about when the "mammal stopped drinking
fresh water" is never.
Your original question was "when did the wolf or bearlike or
cowlike animal decide to start drinking salt water and stop drinking
fresh water.
The answer you were given is "never". No mammilian ancestor of
any marine mammal has "decided" to stop drinking fresh water. The
ability of all marine mammals to drink fresh water makes the answer to
your question, never. Yet, you have never acknowledged that your
question had been adequately answered by "evolutionists".
You have pointed out that some marine mammals have started to
drink salt water. This does not change the answer, since no marine
mammal has decided to stop drinking fresh water. The sea otter drinks
salt water in the wild when it can't find any other source of water.
However, the sea otter drinks fresh water in captivity. Obviously, sea
otters have not decided to stop drinking fresh water.
You can't escape acknowledging your mistakes by posting new
threads. You keep on starting new threads. However, I am not going to
waste time searching through old threads. Instead, I will start with a
reminder of your mistakes which you still haven't acknowledged in an
old thread. Then, I will address the new issue.
> Charles Darwin claimed that the domesticated
> chicken derives from the red jungle fowl, but new
> research now shows that the wild origins of the
> chicken trace instead to the gray jungle fowl.
However, it is still a jungle fowl.
I am not even sure that the red fowl is considered a different
species than the gray fowl. Maybe the red/gray is just a polygenetic
trait, like white/brown skin in humans. You consider fruit flies the
same species even when they can't cross breed. In the same sense, a
gray fowl is the same species as a red fowl.
I suspect the two varieties of jungle fowl, red and gray,
overlap. Or there may be no genetic separation at all. There is no
geographical or genetic separation between the two foxes. You put a
silver fox in the sun, and it turns red! Just like there are no pink
flamingos. A pink flamingo is one which has had a large amount of wild
shrimp, which contain carotene. A pink flamingo without wild shrimp is
a gray flamingo. Or what about brown and blue eyed humans.
According to your logic, they are all fowl. No fundamental
change has occurred.
> Darwin, while never doing any actual science of
> his own, had cadged information from breeders.
You, never doing science on your own, accept "answersingenesis"
with no question.
You are tied with Ray Martinez for least skeptical Creationist.
However, take heart. You are catching up to Ray.
> His confident claims of 'chicken evolution' now
> crumble into dust, with the rest of his 'Theories.
You are still clinging to this memorized theory that
"evolutionists say that the ancestor of the whale decided to stop
drinking fresh water." Since whales haven't lost their ability to
drink fresh water, your theory crumbles in the dust.
If there is a vote to be taken, then that is the category that I
choose. How many out there think of Loirbaj as the most "queer-
sounding" Creationist on the Creationist and Atheist forums?

Doc Smartass

unread,
Oct 17, 2011, 8:22:41 PM10/17/11
to
Loirbaj <Rhod...@wmconnect.com> wrote in news:f166d08b-d50c-4e3b-9ab6-
228a4e...@g16g2000yqa.googlegroups.com:

> Subject: Evolution WRONG About Origins of Chicken

Chicken comes from KFC. I have a box of proof right here.

--
Doc Smartass, BAAWA Knight of Aimin' to Misbehave aa # 1939

Kooks! http://kookclearinghouse.blogspot.com/

Books! http://jw-bookblog.blogspot.com/

Tea Parties are for little kids.

Christopher A. Lee

unread,
Oct 17, 2011, 8:26:52 PM10/17/11
to
On Mon, 17 Oct 2011 19:22:41 -0500, Doc Smartass
<Fortbr...@yahoobrick.com> wrote:

>Loirbaj <Rhod...@wmconnect.com> wrote in news:f166d08b-d50c-4e3b-9ab6-
>228a4e...@g16g2000yqa.googlegroups.com:
>
>> Subject: Evolution WRONG About Origins of Chicken
>
>Chicken comes from KFC. I have a box of proof right here.

Cluck off and fry.

sbalneav

unread,
Oct 17, 2011, 8:38:01 PM10/17/11
to
On 11-10-17 04:23 PM, Christopher A. Lee wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Oct 2011 16:11:52 -0500, sbalneav<sbal...@alburg.net>

<snip jabriol's prattle>

>> Red or grey, if you shove a beer can up their heiney,
>> coat 'em in a mixture of Italian seasoning, onion powder,
>> garlic powder, salt, and a bit of cayenne pepper, and put
>> 'em over indirect heat on the BBQ for about 1-3/4 hours,
>> they're DELICIOUS. For best results, add corn on the cob,
>> and home-made biscuits! Beer also accompanies this meal
>> well. For dessert: apple pie& French vanilla ice-cream.
>>
>> YUM!
>
> I stuff them with chopped bacon, breadcrumbs and mixed Italian herbs
> (plus egg and milk to bind it) and then pot roast them slowly with
> tomato, onion and mushroom - plus my own secret: covered with orange
> slices that disintegrate as it cooks, suffusing the meat with flavour.
>
> Pot roasting keeps the meat moist and tender, and the orange,
> vegetables and meat juice makes a unique and wonderful gravy.

That sounds... completely awesome. Saving this recipe, and the next
chicken I do (might be a few weeks; I'm out of town on a conference
next week) I'll let you know how it turns out.

sbalneav

unread,
Oct 17, 2011, 8:47:56 PM10/17/11
to
On 11-10-17 06:32 PM, SkyEyes wrote:
> On Oct 17, 2:11 pm, sbalneav<sbaln...@alburg.net> wrote:
>> On 11-10-17 02:55 PM, Loirbaj wrote:
>>
>>> Charles Darwin claimed that the domesticated
>>> chicken derives from the red jungle fowl, but new
>>> research now shows that the wild origins of the
>>> chicken trace instead to the gray jungle fowl.
>>
>> Red or grey, if you shove a beer can up their heiney,
>> coat 'em in a mixture of Italian seasoning, onion powder,
>> garlic powder, salt, and a bit of cayenne pepper, and put
>> 'em over indirect heat on the BBQ for about 1-3/4 hours,
>> they're DELICIOUS. For best results, add corn on the cob,
>> and home-made biscuits! Beer also accompanies this meal
>> well. For dessert: apple pie& French vanilla ice-cream.
>>
>> YUM!
>
> I'm comin' to *your* house for dinner. What time do we eat?

Usually 7:00. :)

In case you're interested, here's a youtube of a beercan chicken
recipe. I can vouch for the fact that it turns out perfect every
time. If you're unsure the first time, just use slightly less
coals. You'll just have to roast a bit longer. Note that
beer isn't necessary; a pop does just fine, and using water with
lemon in it, or orange juice, or what have you works great too.

Here's the rub I use to coat:

2 tblspoon Italiano seasoning
1 tblspoon garlic powder
1 tblspoon onion powder
salt to taste
cayenne pepper to taste

Slather bird with olive oil, rub on dry mix.

takes LITERALLY 5 minutes to prepare.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xS6R2IzDI10

And if you like pork, this one's a hoot.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6w3AVSNzxT4

Christopher A. Lee

unread,
Oct 17, 2011, 8:52:42 PM10/17/11
to
On Mon, 17 Oct 2011 19:38:01 -0500, sbalneav <sbal...@alburg.net>
wrote:
Thanks.

Remember it's a pot roast - seal it in cooking foil and cook long and
slow.

If it's done properly it's so tender that when you put it on the
carving tray the wings and legs don't want to come with it.

The chicken doesn't brown this way so you have to brown it separately.
The British use steel carving trays with little spikes in them to hold
the meat in place, so you cantransfer the chicken to it and put it
back in the oven to brown while you make the gravy in the original
pan.

If you haven't got one of these, just use a second pan.

You can cook duck or turkey this way too but the turkey takes a big
pan and lots of foil.

Even with chicken use two large pieces of foil. One underneath and one
on top, with the edges folded over and brimped together.

And watch out for steam when you break into it when it's cooked.

Don't ever let people tell you how bad British cooking is - you won't
get this sort of thing in a restaurant because it takes a lonmg time
to do.

I cook green vegetables with a small amount of water in the bottom of
a pan, bring to the boi, add the vegetables and cover with a lid. That
way they steam instead of boiling in the water.

When they're cooked I add what's left of the water into the gravy.

Good luck....Chris

sbalneav

unread,
Oct 17, 2011, 9:08:41 PM10/17/11
to
Check, brown after.

> If you haven't got one of these, just use a second pan.
>
> You can cook duck or turkey this way too but the turkey takes a big
> pan and lots of foil.

I've got a very nice Wagner cast iron dutch oven manufactured in 1922
which I use for pot roasting. Seals up tighter than a drum, and with
the weight of the lid, I swear I get a little "pressure cooking" effect.
They don't make 'em like that anymore.

'Prolly a 250F (120C) oven, correct?

> Even with chicken use two large pieces of foil. One underneath and one
> on top, with the edges folded over and brimped together.
>
> And watch out for steam when you break into it when it's cooked.
>
> Don't ever let people tell you how bad British cooking is - you won't
> get this sort of thing in a restaurant because it takes a lonmg time
> to do.

The British invented the English breakfast:

http://www.countingcats.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/english-breakfast-blackpudding.jpg

That's the kind of breakfast that builds Empires. Plate of that and I'm
ready
to don my Green uniform and Baker rifle and march all over Spain. You
won't be
hearing any slights about English culinary prowess from *me*.

> I cook green vegetables with a small amount of water in the bottom of
> a pan, bring to the boi, add the vegetables and cover with a lid. That
> way they steam instead of boiling in the water.
>
> When they're cooked I add what's left of the water into the gravy.
>
> Good luck....Chris

Looking forward to it!

Christopher A. Lee

unread,
Oct 17, 2011, 9:53:35 PM10/17/11
to
On Mon, 17 Oct 2011 20:08:41 -0500, sbalneav <sbal...@alburg.net>
In theory, but the dial on the oven control is never accurate and
varies from cooker to cooker.

I allow half an hour per pound plus "a bit more".

I'd done this when my parents were away, and when I was a student. But
when I bought my first house it came out undercooked even though the
dial said 250, so unless I know the oven I start at 300 on the dial
and adjust it next time.

My current oven shows about 275.

You can't use a thermometer for this because it's sealed.

But a pot roast is fairly forgiving.

I allow half an hour per pound instead of the usual 20 minutes,
because the stuffing is inside the bird - and the bacon herbs also add
to the flavour.

I also pot roast beef and lamb, but without the oranges.

It's traditional middle class cooking from the days when kitchens had
large coal/coke ranges that heated the house and provided hot water.
You could fry, boil or poach in pans on the top, or cook in an
attached oven.

>> Even with chicken use two large pieces of foil. One underneath and one
>> on top, with the edges folded over and brimped together.
>>
>> And watch out for steam when you break into it when it's cooked.
>>
>> Don't ever let people tell you how bad British cooking is - you won't
>> get this sort of thing in a restaurant because it takes a lonmg time
>> to do.
>
>The British invented the English breakfast:
>
>http://www.countingcats.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/english-breakfast-blackpudding.jpg

Mmmm... sets you up for the day.

But you can't get a good black pudding in the US.

>That's the kind of breakfast that builds Empires. Plate of that and I'm
>ready
>to don my Green uniform and Baker rifle and march all over Spain. You
>won't be
>hearing any slights about English culinary prowess from *me*.

Thanks.

I like Kedgeree for breakfast. It's based on the Indian Kedgeri but
uses flaked, smoked haddock instead of lentils.

But you can't get smoked haddock here either :-(

>> I cook green vegetables with a small amount of water in the bottom of
>> a pan, bring to the boi, add the vegetables and cover with a lid. That
>> way they steam instead of boiling in the water.
>>
>> When they're cooked I add what's left of the water into the gravy.
>>
>> Good luck....Chris
>
>Looking forward to it!

Let me know how you get on.

VoiceOfReason

unread,
Oct 17, 2011, 11:09:26 PM10/17/11
to
On Oct 17, 9:08 pm, sbalneav <sbaln...@alburg.net> wrote:
> On 11-10-17 07:52 PM, Christopher A. Lee wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Mon, 17 Oct 2011 19:38:01 -0500, sbalneav<sbaln...@alburg.net>
> > wrote:
>
> >> On 11-10-17 04:23 PM, Christopher A. Lee wrote:
> >>> On Mon, 17 Oct 2011 16:11:52 -0500, sbalneav<sbaln...@alburg.net>
> http://www.countingcats.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/english-breakf...
>
> That's the kind of breakfast that builds Empires.  Plate of that and I'm
> ready
> to don my Green uniform and Baker rifle and march all over Spain. You
> won't be
> hearing any slights about English culinary prowess from *me*.

DAMN that looks good. Rule Britannia! :-D


Alex W.

unread,
Oct 18, 2011, 6:55:35 AM10/18/11
to
Word of caution: this doesn't apply to turkey, but duck and
goose, when roasted this way, produce copious amounts of fat.
This means that when you take the bird out of the oven, there is
a risk that the liquid and VERY HOT fat will slosh about and
unbalance the heavy oven tray, possibly even slopping over the
edges to burn hands or feet. Don't ask me how I know this.

Oh, and do save the fat. Either duck or goose fat are a msot
excellent and tasty substitute for butter or lard when frying
potatoes.


> Don't ever let people tell you how bad British cooking is - you won't
> get this sort of thing in a restaurant because it takes a lonmg time
> to do.

One singular exception and a strong restaurant recommendation for
any visitor to London: Simpson's On The Strand. They have made
roasts a speciality for more than 100 years, and they have both
the kitchen capacity and the experience to roast very large cuts
to perfection on a daily basis. It's a meat-eater's heaven.

MarkA

unread,
Oct 18, 2011, 10:46:27 AM10/18/11
to
It's posts like this that make me think that Jabbers is just being a
parody of himself. Even the most committed Creationist couldn't possibly
think that an error in the lineage of the modern chicken could cast doubt
on the entire Theory of Evolution, could they?

--
MarkA
Keeper of Things Put There Only Just The Night Before
About eight o'clock

harry k

unread,
Oct 18, 2011, 10:59:21 AM10/18/11
to
On Oct 17, 12:55 pm, Loirbaj <Rhodi...@wmconnect.com> wrote:
Have a cite for that claim? And saying you got it from your asshole
doesn't count.

Harry K

harry k

unread,
Oct 18, 2011, 11:00:09 AM10/18/11
to
On Oct 17, 2:23 pm, Christopher A. Lee <ca...@optonline.net> wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Oct 2011 16:11:52 -0500, sbalneav <sbaln...@alburg.net>
And no matter how you prepare it, it still tastes like dinosaur.

Harry K

Loirbaj

unread,
Oct 18, 2011, 11:27:44 AM10/18/11
to
MarkA said,
BroilJAB couldn't possibly think that an error
in the lineage of the modern chicken could cast
doubt on the entire Theory of Evolution, could he?

BroilJAB said,
Rather, my (long series of) posts show that time
after time 'Darwin had a theory' which was wrong.
Darwin's Theory of Inheritance (Pangenesis) WRONG
Darwin's Theory of Atoll Formation WRONG
Darwin's Theory of Earth Worm Movement WRONG
Darwin's Theory of Origin of Species WRONG
Darwin's Theory of Peacock Coloration WRONG
Darwin's Theory of Denudation of the Weald WRONG
Darwin's Theory of Man had a tail WRONG
Darwin's Theory of Bear evolving to Whales WRONG
The list runs to many pages.

Uergil

unread,
Oct 18, 2011, 5:29:21 PM10/18/11
to
In article
<cd77a331-2bfa-4ece...@gy7g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>,
Loirbaj <Rhod...@wmconnect.com> wrote:

> MarkA said,
> BroilJAB couldn't possibly think that an error
> in the lineage of the modern chicken could cast
> doubt on the entire Theory of Evolution, could he?
>
> BroilJAB said,
> Rather, my (long series of) posts show that time
> after time 'Darwin had a theory' which was wrong.

As do most scientific explorers of any quality.

And it is not by their failured theories but by their successful ones
that the worth of scientists is measured.

And Darwin's SUCCESSFUL THEORIES shook the world!
--
"Ignorance is preferable to error, and he is less
remote from the- truth who believes nothing than
he who believes what is wrong.
Thomas Jefferson

Hannele

unread,
Oct 19, 2011, 6:25:34 PM10/19/11
to
For slow cooking, especially chicken, use a Moroccan tajine, those terra
cotta dishes with the large, domed lids. It'll cook slowly and evenly,
without drying out, while all the scents and tastes mingle.

--
Hannele, A.A #2211

There are at least as many gods as there are believers.

Father Haskell

unread,
Oct 19, 2011, 6:40:53 PM10/19/11
to
Drink half the can (Important! Do not neglect!), then punch
additional holes in the top with a church key. Pour in a
couple tbsp of basic 4-way rub (equal parts paprika, black
pepper, kosher salt, and brown sugar), coat chicken
with remaining rub. Stuff chicken with can. Indirect heat,
~2 hours, until 185F in thickest part of thigh.

Alex W.

unread,
Oct 19, 2011, 8:01:09 PM10/19/11
to
Proper ones can be hard to come by. A good alternative is a
Romertopf, or clay pot. Soak in water before popping it in the
oven, and any roast will come out sweet and juicy.

Loirbaj

unread,
Oct 19, 2011, 9:07:05 PM10/19/11
to
Charles Darwin claimed that the domesticated
chicken derives from the red jungle fowl, but new
research now shows that the wild origins of the
chicken trace instead to the gray jungle fowl.
Darwin, while never doing any actual science of
his own, had cadged information from breeders.
His confident claims of 'chicken evolution' now
crumble into dust, with the rest of his 'Theories.

MarkA said,
BroilJAB couldn't possibly think that an error
in the lineage of the modern chicken could cast
doubt on the entire Theory of Evolution, could he?

BroilJAB said,
Rather, my (long series of) posts show that time
after time 'Darwin had a theory' which was wrong.

chibiabos

unread,
Oct 19, 2011, 9:42:53 PM10/19/11
to
In article <5hgj8pd1uapw$.1pk1dlaj...@40tude.net>, Alex W.
<ing...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

> Oh, and do save the fat. Either duck or goose fat are a msot
> excellent and tasty substitute for butter or lard when frying
> potatoes.

I make beurre manie from the fat. These are grape-sized balls made from
equal parts fat and flour (just mix the two together to the consistency
of Pla-Doh and form into small balls). The beurre manie can be frozen
for later use. Pop one or two out of the freezer and into the pot to
thicken a sauce or a soup.

(Technically, buerre manie is made from butter and flour, hence
"buerre," but fats from roast fowl work just as well and with more
flavor, IMO.)

-chib

--
Member of S.M.A.S.H.
Sarcastic Middle-aged Atheists with a Sense of Humor

Jeanne Douglas

unread,
Oct 19, 2011, 10:47:28 PM10/19/11
to
In article
<e73f1797-0e3e-45de...@m19g2000vbm.googlegroups.com>,
And still evolution is FACT. Whine and lie all you want, it's still fact.

--
JD

"the lybian lier"

sbalneav

unread,
Oct 19, 2011, 11:32:29 PM10/19/11
to
On 11-10-17 02:55 PM, Loirbaj wrote:

<snip>

Thread contains:

Several good posts on cooking and recipies.
Completely useless information from Loirbaj.

Uergil

unread,
Oct 20, 2011, 1:05:11 AM10/20/11
to
> Charles Darwin claimed that the domesticated
> chicken derives from the red jungle fowl, but new
> research now shows that the wild origins of the
> chicken trace instead to the gray jungle fowl.

So now Evolution is more correct than ever!

Any new theory is bound to have minor glitches in its first form that
gradually get corrected and smoothed out. Evolution is no exception.

Thank you for notifying us of Evolution's improvement!


> It's highly plausible that in the universe there are God-like
> creatures. It零 very important to understand that they all came into
> being by an EXPLICABLE SCIENTIFIC PROGRESSION OF INCREMENTAL
> EVOLUTION.- Richard Dawkins

SkyEyes

unread,
Oct 20, 2011, 3:00:55 AM10/20/11
to
On Oct 19, 6:42 pm, chibiabos <c...@nospam.com> wrote:
> In article <5hgj8pd1uapw$.1pk1dlajoo7or....@40tude.net>, Alex W.
>
> <ing...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> > Oh, and do save the fat.  Either duck or goose fat are a msot
> > excellent and tasty substitute for butter or lard when frying
> > potatoes.
>
> I make beurre manie from the fat. These are grape-sized balls made from
> equal parts fat and flour (just mix the two together to the consistency
> of Pla-Doh and form into small balls). The beurre manie can be frozen
> for later use. Pop one or two out of the freezer and into the pot to
> thicken a sauce or a soup.
>
> (Technically, buerre manie is made from butter and flour, hence
> "buerre," but fats from roast fowl work just as well and with more
> flavor, IMO.)

Transcribing this technique into my own cooking notes. Thank you!

Loirbaj

unread,
Oct 20, 2011, 5:39:53 AM10/20/11
to
Rather, my (long series of) posts show that time
after time 'Darwin had a theory' which was wrong.
Darwin's Theory of Inheritance (Pangenesis) WRONG
Darwin's Theory of Atoll Formation WRONG
Darwin's Theory of Earth Worm Movement WRONG
Darwin's Theory of Origin of Species WRONG
Darwin's Theory of Peacock Coloration WRONG
Darwin's Theory of Denudation of the Weald WRONG
Darwin's Theory of Man had a tail WRONG
Darwin's Theory of Bear evolving to Whales WRONG





It's highly plausible that in the universe there
are God-like creatures. - Richard Dawkins

VoiceOfReason

unread,
Oct 20, 2011, 8:28:00 AM10/20/11
to
On Oct 20, 3:00 am, SkyEyes <skyey...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Oct 19, 6:42 pm, chibiabos <c...@nospam.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > In article <5hgj8pd1uapw$.1pk1dlajoo7or....@40tude.net>, Alex W.
>
> > <ing...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> > > Oh, and do save the fat.  Either duck or goose fat are a msot
> > > excellent and tasty substitute for butter or lard when frying
> > > potatoes.
>
> > I make beurre manie from the fat. These are grape-sized balls made from
> > equal parts fat and flour (just mix the two together to the consistency
> > of Pla-Doh and form into small balls). The beurre manie can be frozen
> > for later use. Pop one or two out of the freezer and into the pot to
> > thicken a sauce or a soup.
>
> > (Technically, buerre manie is made from butter and flour, hence
> > "buerre," but fats from roast fowl work just as well and with more
> > flavor, IMO.)
>
> Transcribing this technique into my own cooking notes.  Thank you!

I KNEW there were advantages of frequenting this newsgroup! :-D


Alex W.

unread,
Oct 20, 2011, 8:46:58 AM10/20/11
to
On Wed, 19 Oct 2011 18:42:53 -0700, chibiabos wrote:

> In article <5hgj8pd1uapw$.1pk1dlaj...@40tude.net>, Alex W.
> <ing...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> Oh, and do save the fat. Either duck or goose fat are a msot
>> excellent and tasty substitute for butter or lard when frying
>> potatoes.
>
> I make beurre manie from the fat. These are grape-sized balls made from
> equal parts fat and flour (just mix the two together to the consistency
> of Pla-Doh and form into small balls). The beurre manie can be frozen
> for later use. Pop one or two out of the freezer and into the pot to
> thicken a sauce or a soup.
>
> (Technically, buerre manie is made from butter and flour, hence
> "buerre," but fats from roast fowl work just as well and with more
> flavor, IMO.)

Hmmm .... I wonder what these would taste like, deep-fried.

Loirbaj

unread,
Oct 20, 2011, 11:28:02 AM10/20/11
to

ilbe...@gmail.com

unread,
Oct 20, 2011, 11:46:26 AM10/20/11
to
> are God-like creatures. - Top Militant Atheist Dr. Richard Dawkins

How certain are evolutionists of evolution? Of course, no believer in
evolution is going to go on national television and say that he is not
sure of evolution. However, within the scientific community, those who
really know the facts don't always sound so convinced of their
arguments.

The great philosopher of science, Dr. Karl Popper, wrote that
Darwinism is not even a scientific theory because it cannot be tested.
Even the prestigious British Museum of Natural History offered this
admission on one of its displays. That admission, by the way, created
a scandal among American evolutionists. Dr. Colin Patterson, head of
paleontology at the British Museum, was responsible for this display.
He wrote in his book Evolution that evolution is simply a metaphysical
system used to arrange scientific evidence. It is not a conclusion of
science at all.

Even evolutionists Stephen J. Gould and Niles Eldredge recognized that
the fossil record shows that creatures appeared suddenly and fully
formed – without any ancestors. However, they claim that these were
lucky jumps of evolution.

Our conclusion must be that even the experts, in moments of honesty –
when they know they won't be quoted in the press – admit that
evolution is no more than a faith. We creationists will report what
the press does not. Evolution is truly a faith. We have a faith, too.
But our faith has been revealed by God in His Holy Word.

Phil. 4:13

Ken

unread,
Oct 20, 2011, 12:14:56 PM10/20/11
to
On Oct 20, 8:46 am, "IlBenButtfucked @gmail.com" wrote yet another
load of worthless Daveshite!

Popper said: "I intend to argue that the theory of natural selection
is not a testable scientific theory, but a metaphysical research
programme; . . . [Popper, 1976, p. 151]

Popper later admitted that he was wrong!

The fact that the theory of natural selection is difficult to test has
led some people, anti-Darwinists and even some great Darwinists, to
claim that it is a tautology. . . . I mention this problem because I
too belong among the culprits. Influenced by what these authorities
say, I have in the past described the theory as "almost tautological,"
and I have tried to explain how the theory of natural selection could
be untestable (as is a tautology) and yet of great scientific
interest. My solution was that the doctrine of natural selection is a
most successful metaphysical research programme. . . . [Popper, 1978,
p. 344]

I have changed my mind about the testability and logical status of the
theory of natural selection; and I am glad to have an opportunity to
make a recantation. . . . [p. 345]


VoiceOfReason

unread,
Oct 20, 2011, 12:20:18 PM10/20/11
to


Ken wrote:
> On Oct 20, 8:46 am, "IlBenButtfucked @gmail.com" wrote yet another
> load of worthless Daveshite!
>
> Popper said: "I intend to argue that the theory of natural selection
> is not a testable scientific theory, but a metaphysical research
> programme; . . . [Popper, 1976, p. 151]
>
> Popper later admitted that he was wrong!

Yet creationists ignore that fact and consistently hide the truth.
Yet another example of creationist dishonesty.

Ken

unread,
Oct 20, 2011, 12:27:34 PM10/20/11
to
On Oct 20, 9:20 am, VoiceOfReason <papa_...@cybertown.com> wrote:
> Ken wrote:
> > On Oct 20, 8:46 am, "IlBenButtfucked @gmail.com" wrote yet another
> > load of worthless Daveshite!
>
> > Popper said: "I intend to argue that the theory of natural selection
> > is not a testable scientific theory, but a metaphysical research
> > programme; . . . [Popper, 1976, p. 151]
>
> > Popper later admitted that he was wrong!
>
> Yet creationists ignore that fact and consistently hide the truth.
> Yet another example of creationist dishonesty.
> -

CreatioNUTs ignore everything, except for their delusions!

Dimwitted Dave..Please notice the CORRECT spelling of "their"

Uergil

unread,
Oct 20, 2011, 3:12:10 PM10/20/11
to
In article
<bdc4e744-be79-4c2d...@k2g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>,
Loirbaj <Rhod...@wmconnect.com> wrote:

> It's highly plausible that in the universe there are God-like
> creatures. It零 very important to understand that they all came into
> being by an EXPLICABLE SCIENTIFIC PROGRESSION OF INCREMENTAL
> EVOLUTION.- Richard Dawkins

.

Uergil

unread,
Oct 20, 2011, 3:29:15 PM10/20/11
to
In article
<ebc3e596-34f4-40c3...@p1g2000yqk.googlegroups.com>,
"IlBe...@gmail.com" <ilbe...@gmail.com> wrote:


> It's highly plausible that in the universe there are God-like
> creatures. Itąs very important to understand that they all came into
> being by an EXPLICABLE SCIENTIFIC PROGRESSION OF INCREMENTAL
> EVOLUTION.- Richard Dawkins

>
> How certain are evolutionists of evolution? Of course, no believer in
> evolution is going to go on national television and say that he is not
> sure of evolution. However, within the scientific community, those who
> really know the facts don't always sound so convinced of their
> arguments.
>
> The great philosopher of science, Dr. Karl Popper, wrote that
> Darwinism is not even a scientific theory because it cannot be tested.

But upon reflection, Popper reversed himself and said was a proper
scientific theory.
http://atheism.about.com/b/2006/06/20/karl-popper-and-evolution-is-evolut
ionary-theory-based-on-a-tautology.htm

Karl Popper was a philosopher rather than a scientist, but he
demonstrated the scientific mindset: he changed his mind about a
conclusion he reached once he was show new information which
contradicted his beliefs. This often isn't easy to do because no one
likes to be wrong; with some conscious work, though, a person can make
it a bit easier and learn to accept their own fallibility.

harry k

unread,
Oct 20, 2011, 4:24:46 PM10/20/11
to
On Oct 20, 2:39 am, Loirbaj <Rhodi...@wmconnect.com> wrote:
> Rather, my (long series of) posts show that time
> after time 'Darwin had a theory' which was wrong.
> Darwin's Theory of Inheritance (Pangenesis) WRONG
> Darwin's Theory of Atoll Formation               WRONG
> Darwin's Theory of Earth Worm Movement    WRONG
> Darwin's Theory of Origin of Species             WRONG
> Darwin's Theory of Peacock Coloration          WRONG
> Darwin's Theory of Denudation of the Weald   WRONG
> Darwin's Theory of Man had a tail                  WRONG
> Darwin's Theory of Bear evolving to Whales    WRONG
>


YOu seem to have forgotten to include the rest of the quote so I
fixed it for you, no need to thank me.

> It's highly plausible that in the universe there are God-like
> creatures. It¹s very important to understand that they all came into
> being by an EXPLICABLE SCIENTIFIC PROGRESSION OF INCREMENTAL
> EVOLUTION.- Richard Dawkins

"The word god is for me nothing more than the expression
and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection
of honourable, but still primitive legends which are
nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation no matter
how subtle can (for me) change this."
Albert Einstein, Letter to philosopher Eric Gutkind, January 3, 1954

Harry K

Loirbaj

unread,
Oct 21, 2011, 12:16:54 AM10/21/11
to
DAVE said,
The great philosopher of science, Dr. Karl Popper, wrote that
Darwinism is not even a scientific theory because it cannot be
tested.
Even the prestigious British Museum of Natural History offered this
admission on one of its displays. That admission, by the way, created
a scandal among American evolutionists. Dr. Colin Patterson, head of
paleontology at the British Museum, was responsible for this display.
He wrote in his book Evolution that evolution is simply a
metaphysical
system used to arrange scientific evidence. It is not a conclusion of
science at all.

Even evolutionists Stephen J. Gould
recognized that

BroilJAB said,
And notice that the atheist community was
frantic, and threated and browbeat Popper
and Gould to try and get them to recant and
to again 'bless' evolution.

Uergil

unread,
Oct 21, 2011, 12:44:09 AM10/21/11
to
In article
<6bbd80cf-ecb8-4ffd...@k35g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>,
Loirbaj <Rhod...@wmconnect.com> wrote:


> The great philosopher of science, Dr. Karl Popper, wrote that
> Darwinism is not even a scientific theory because it cannot be
> tested.

But as he grew wiser, Popper reversed himself and reclassified Darwin's
Evolution as a proper (and Popper) Science, perfectly capable of being
tested by standard scientific methods.

But Liarbaj and his ill ilk are living way in the past (essentially
pre-Darwin scientifically) and haven't caught up to even the 20th
century yet.

> It's highly plausible that in the universe there are God-like
> creatures. It零 very important to understand that they all came into
> being by an EXPLICABLE SCIENTIFIC PROGRESSION OF INCREMENTAL
> EVOLUTION.- Richard Dawkins

Devils Advocaat

unread,
Oct 21, 2011, 2:53:38 AM10/21/11
to
Poor Harold Camping said:

The world will end on May 21, 1988 he got that wrong.

The world will end on Sep 6, 1994 he got that wrong too.

The world will end on May 21, 2011 gosh that was wrong as well.

The world will end on Oct 21, 2011 any bets he will be wrong again?

Devils Advocaat

unread,
Oct 21, 2011, 2:50:54 AM10/21/11
to
On Oct 20, 4:28 pm, Loirbaj <Rhodi...@wmconnect.com> wrote:

Arindam Banerjee

unread,
Oct 21, 2011, 4:44:09 AM10/21/11
to
Why do you believe in that so much?
Cheers,
Arindam Banerjee
>
> Phil.  4:13

John Baker

unread,
Oct 21, 2011, 12:53:55 PM10/21/11
to
On Mon, 17 Oct 2011 16:34:06 -0700 (PDT), Darwin123
<drose...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>On Oct 17, 3:55 pm, Loirbaj <Rhodi...@wmconnect.com> wrote:
> You still haven't acknowledged your mistake. Marine mammals
>never lost their ability to drink fresh water. Therefore, the answer
>to your rhetorical question about when the "mammal stopped drinking
>fresh water" is never.
> Your original question was "when did the wolf or bearlike or
>cowlike animal decide to start drinking salt water and stop drinking
>fresh water.
> The answer you were given is "never". No mammilian ancestor of
>any marine mammal has "decided" to stop drinking fresh water. The
>ability of all marine mammals to drink fresh water makes the answer to
>your question, never. Yet, you have never acknowledged that your
>question had been adequately answered by "evolutionists".
> You have pointed out that some marine mammals have started to
>drink salt water. This does not change the answer, since no marine
>mammal has decided to stop drinking fresh water. The sea otter drinks
>salt water in the wild when it can't find any other source of water.
>However, the sea otter drinks fresh water in captivity. Obviously, sea
>otters have not decided to stop drinking fresh water.
> You can't escape acknowledging your mistakes by posting new
>threads. You keep on starting new threads. However, I am not going to
>waste time searching through old threads. Instead, I will start with a
>reminder of your mistakes which you still haven't acknowledged in an
>old thread. Then, I will address the new issue.
>> Charles Darwin claimed that the domesticated
>> chicken derives from the red jungle fowl, but new
>> research now shows that the wild origins of the
>> chicken trace instead to the gray jungle fowl.
> However, it is still a jungle fowl.
> I am not even sure that the red fowl is considered a different
>species than the gray fowl. Maybe the red/gray is just a polygenetic
>trait, like white/brown skin in humans. You consider fruit flies the
>same species even when they can't cross breed. In the same sense, a
>gray fowl is the same species as a red fowl.
> I suspect the two varieties of jungle fowl, red and gray,
>overlap. Or there may be no genetic separation at all. There is no
>geographical or genetic separation between the two foxes. You put a
>silver fox in the sun, and it turns red! Just like there are no pink
>flamingos. A pink flamingo is one which has had a large amount of wild
>shrimp, which contain carotene. A pink flamingo without wild shrimp is
>a gray flamingo. Or what about brown and blue eyed humans.
> According to your logic, they are all fowl. No fundamental
>change has occurred.
>> Darwin, while never doing any actual science of
>> his own, had cadged information from breeders.
> You, never doing science on your own, accept "answersingenesis"
>with no question.
> You are tied with Ray Martinez for least skeptical Creationist.
>However, take heart. You are catching up to Ray.
>> His confident claims of 'chicken evolution' now
>> crumble into dust, with the rest of his 'Theories.
> You are still clinging to this memorized theory that
>"evolutionists say that the ancestor of the whale decided to stop
>drinking fresh water." Since whales haven't lost their ability to
>drink fresh water, your theory crumbles in the dust.
> If there is a vote to be taken, then that is the category that I
>choose. How many out there think of Loirbaj as the most "queer-
>sounding" Creationist on the Creationist and Atheist forums?


"He" isn't a creationist. "He" is a bunch of trolling kiddies from AUK
tossing out bait and getting bites from all sorts of people who should
know better.

John Baker

unread,
Oct 21, 2011, 12:54:36 PM10/21/11
to
On Mon, 17 Oct 2011 17:26:52 -0700, Christopher A. Lee
<ca...@optonline.net> wrote:

>On Mon, 17 Oct 2011 19:22:41 -0500, Doc Smartass
><Fortbr...@yahoobrick.com> wrote:
>
>>Loirbaj <Rhod...@wmconnect.com> wrote in news:f166d08b-d50c-4e3b-9ab6-
>>228a4e...@g16g2000yqa.googlegroups.com:
>>
>>> Subject: Evolution WRONG About Origins of Chicken
>>
>>Chicken comes from KFC. I have a box of proof right here.
>
>Cluck off and fry.

Stop egging him on.


Loirbaj

unread,
Oct 21, 2011, 12:59:01 PM10/21/11
to
Rather, my (long series of) posts show that time
after time 'Darwin had a theory' which was wrong.
Darwin's Theory of Inheritance (Pangenesis) WRONG
Darwin's Theory of Atoll Formation WRONG
Darwin's Theory of Earth Worm Movement WRONG
Darwin's Theory of Origin of Species WRONG
Darwin's Theory of Peacock Coloration WRONG
Darwin's Theory of Denudation of the Weald WRONG
Darwin's Theory of Man had a tail WRONG
Darwin's Theory of Bear evolving to Whales WRONG

Miss Freeper said that she'
Wants to talk about kook World End claims

BroilJAB said,
Faced with stark evidence of falsified evolution
claims, Ma'am...I can not blame your evasion.


It's highly plausible that in the universe there
are God-like creatures. - Richard Dawkins

Dakota

unread,
Oct 21, 2011, 1:01:41 PM10/21/11
to
Which one of you started it?

Loirbaj

unread,
Oct 21, 2011, 1:01:44 PM10/21/11
to
Rather, my (long series of) posts show that time
after time 'Darwin had a theory' which was wrong.
Darwin's Theory of Inheritance (Pangenesis) WRONG
Darwin's Theory of Atoll Formation WRONG
Darwin's Theory of Earth Worm Movement WRONG
Darwin's Theory of Origin of Species WRONG
Darwin's Theory of Peacock Coloration WRONG
Darwin's Theory of Denudation of the Weald WRONG
Darwin's Theory of Man had a tail WRONG
Darwin's Theory of Bear evolving to Whales WRONG

mike said,
There should be laws to prevent religious fanatics
like you from reciting Darwin's embarrassing
gaffes and bizarre claims. As atheists, we simply
believe on Darwin, the gentle genius.

BroilJAB tapped pipe, laughing

All-Seeing-|

unread,
Oct 21, 2011, 1:09:45 PM10/21/11
to

"Devils Advocaat" <manky...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:49e3ba0d-24e1-45ff...@h14g2000yqi.googlegroups.com...
The world will end on Oct 21, 2011 any bets he will be wrong again?\
=----------------


Maybe if you would read the bible you would not become fooled by people like Camping. You
would already know that he will be wrong each and every time he makes one of his stupid
predictions.

Jesus said, No one knows the day of the hour. Simple, eh?









--- Posted via news://freenews.netfront.net/ - Complaints to ne...@netfront.net ---

Devils Advocaat

unread,
Oct 21, 2011, 1:30:05 PM10/21/11
to
On Oct 21, 6:09 pm, "All-Seeing-|" <allseei...@usa.com> wrote:
> "Devils Advocaat" <mankygo...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:49e3ba0d-24e1-45ff...@h14g2000yqi.googlegroups.com...
> On Oct 20, 4:28 pm, Loirbaj <Rhodi...@wmconnect.com> wrote:
>
> > Rather, my (long series of) posts show that time
> > after time 'Darwin had a theory' which was wrong.
> > Darwin's Theory of Inheritance (Pangenesis) WRONG
> > Darwin's Theory of Atoll Formation WRONG
> > Darwin's Theory of Earth Worm Movement WRONG
> > Darwin's Theory of Origin of Species WRONG
> > Darwin's Theory of Peacock Coloration WRONG
> > Darwin's Theory of Denudation of the Weald WRONG
> > Darwin's Theory of Man had a tail WRONG
> > Darwin's Theory of Bear evolving to Whales WRONG
>
> > It's highly plausible that in the universe there
> > are God-like creatures. - Richard Dawkins
>
> Poor Harold Camping said:
>
> The world will end on May 21, 1988 he got that wrong.
>
> The world will end on Sep 6, 1994 he got that wrong too.
>
> The world will end on May 21, 2011 gosh that was wrong as well.
>
> The world will end on Oct 21, 2011 any bets he will be wrong again?\
> =----------------
>
> Maybe if you would read the bible you would not become fooled by people like
> Camping.

Does it looked like I am being fooled by him?

You should be more concerned for those Christians who were taken in
before and will be taken in again.

> You
> would already know that he will be wrong each and every time he makes one of his stupid
> predictions.

I guess you didn't read my post carefully enough did you maddy?
>
> Jesus said, No one knows the day of the hour. Simple, eh?
>
So you should be talking to those who take end of the world
predictions seriously.

I don't take them seriously at all.

And I haven't been taken in by this idiot Harold Camping either.

Christopher A. Lee

unread,
Oct 21, 2011, 1:59:33 PM10/21/11
to
On Fri, 21 Oct 2011 12:54:36 -0400, John Baker <nu...@bizniz.net>
wrote:

>On Mon, 17 Oct 2011 17:26:52 -0700, Christopher A. Lee
><ca...@optonline.net> wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 17 Oct 2011 19:22:41 -0500, Doc Smartass
>><Fortbr...@yahoobrick.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Loirbaj <Rhod...@wmconnect.com> wrote in news:f166d08b-d50c-4e3b-9ab6-
>>>228a4e...@g16g2000yqa.googlegroups.com:
>>>
>>>> Subject: Evolution WRONG About Origins of Chicken
>>>
>>>Chicken comes from KFC. I have a box of proof right here.
>>
>>Cluck off and fry.
>
>Stop egging him on.

Was that meant to be a yolk?

jesshc

unread,
Oct 21, 2011, 2:18:41 PM10/21/11
to
On Oct 21, 10:01 am, Loirbaj <Rhodi...@wmconnect.com> wrote:
> Ra

Liar.

Devils Advocaat

unread,
Oct 21, 2011, 2:31:02 PM10/21/11
to
On Oct 21, 6:59 pm, Christopher A. Lee <ca...@optonline.net> wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Oct 2011 12:54:36 -0400, John Baker <nu...@bizniz.net>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >On Mon, 17 Oct 2011 17:26:52 -0700, Christopher A. Lee
> ><ca...@optonline.net> wrote:
>
> >>On Mon, 17 Oct 2011 19:22:41 -0500, Doc Smartass
> >><FortbrickG...@yahoobrick.com> wrote:
>
> >>>Loirbaj <Rhodi...@wmconnect.com> wrote in news:f166d08b-d50c-4e3b-9ab6-
> >>>228a4e6c3...@g16g2000yqa.googlegroups.com:
>
> >>>> Subject: Evolution WRONG About Origins of Chicken
>
> >>>Chicken comes from KFC. I have a box of proof right here.
>
> >>Cluck off and fry.
>
> >Stop egging him on.
>
> Was that meant to be a yolk?

You could be sac'ed for cracking one like that.

Father Haskell

unread,
Oct 21, 2011, 2:44:57 PM10/21/11
to
On Oct 18, 11:00 am, harry k <turnkey4...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Oct 17, 2:23 pm, Christopher A. Lee <ca...@optonline.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Mon, 17 Oct 2011 16:11:52 -0500, sbalneav <sbaln...@alburg.net>
> > wrote:
>
> > >On 11-10-17 02:55 PM, Loirbaj wrote:
> > >> Charles Darwin claimed that the domesticated
> > >> chicken derives from the red jungle fowl, but new
> > >> research now shows that the wild origins of the
> > >> chicken trace instead to the gray jungle fowl.
>
> > So?
>
> > Except that he didn't "claim" this, if he said anything about it, it
> > was theorising and only narrowly missed the mark.
>
> > DNA analysis has allowed us to confirm or correct this sort of thing.
>
> > What's wrong with the moron that he ignores more than 150 years of
> > research since Origin was published?
>
> > >Red or grey, if you shove a beer can up their heiney,
> > >coat 'em in a mixture of Italian seasoning, onion powder,
> > >garlic powder, salt, and a bit of cayenne pepper, and put
> > >'em over indirect heat on the BBQ for about 1-3/4 hours,
> > >they're DELICIOUS.  For best results, add corn on the cob,
> > >and home-made biscuits!  Beer also accompanies this meal
> > >well.  For dessert: apple pie & French vanilla ice-cream.
>
> > >YUM!
>
> > I stuff them with chopped bacon, breadcrumbs and mixed Italian herbs
> > (plus egg and milk to bind it) and then pot roast them slowly with
> > tomato, onion and mushroom - plus my own secret: covered with orange
> > slices that disintegrate as it cooks, suffusing the meat with flavour.
>
> > Pot roasting keeps the meat moist and tender, and the orange,
> > vegetables and meat juice makes a unique and wonderful gravy.
>
> And no matter how you prepare it, it still tastes like dinosaur.
>
> Harry K

Where do you buy a fryer big enough to handle a t-rex drumstick?

Father Haskell

unread,
Oct 21, 2011, 2:53:01 PM10/21/11
to
Ovum my dead body.

Uergil

unread,
Oct 21, 2011, 4:04:46 PM10/21/11
to
In article
<0ccaaa00-cfd6-4dd5...@f11g2000vbm.googlegroups.com>,
Loirbaj <Rhod...@wmconnect.com> wrote:

> Rather, my (long series of) posts show that time
> after time 'Darwin had a theory' which was wrong.

Most scientists have lots of theories which are wrong, but the good ones
eventually have a theory that is right, and Darwin was a great one!


>
> It's highly plausible that in the universe there are God-like

Uergil

unread,
Oct 21, 2011, 4:10:34 PM10/21/11
to
In article
<5aa39292-09fb-4769...@h14g2000yqi.googlegroups.com>,
Loirbaj <Rhod...@wmconnect.com> wrote:

> Rather, my (long series of) posts show that time
> after time 'Darwin had a theory' which was wrong.

Scientists tend to have lots of theories, and most of them will
eventually turn out to be wrong, but really good scientists eventually
may hit on a theory that is right, and Darwin was a really good
scientist who hit on a great theory that was largely right.

Sufficiently right that creationists are incapable of disproving it.

> It's highly plausible that in the universe there are God-like

Uergil

unread,
Oct 21, 2011, 4:28:30 PM10/21/11
to
In article <j7s908$1m62$1...@adenine.netfront.net>,
"All-Seeing-|" <allse...@usa.com> wrote:

> "Devils Advocaat" <manky...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:49e3ba0d-24e1-45ff...@h14g2000yqi.googlegroups.com...
> On Oct 20, 4:28 pm, Loirbaj <Rhodi...@wmconnect.com> wrote:
> > Rather, my (long series of) posts show that time
> > after time 'Darwin had a theory' which was wrong.
> > Darwin's Theory of Inheritance (Pangenesis) WRONG
> > Darwin's Theory of Atoll Formation WRONG
> > Darwin's Theory of Earth Worm Movement WRONG
> > Darwin's Theory of Origin of Species WRONG
> > Darwin's Theory of Peacock Coloration WRONG
> > Darwin's Theory of Denudation of the Weald WRONG
> > Darwin's Theory of Man had a tail WRONG
> > Darwin's Theory of Bear evolving to Whales WRONG
> >
> > It's highly plausible that in the universe there
> > are God-like creatures. - Richard Dawkins
>
> Poor Harold Camping said:
>
> The world will end on May 21, 1988 he got that wrong.
>
> The world will end on Sep 6, 1994 he got that wrong too.
>
> The world will end on May 21, 2011 gosh that was wrong as well.
>
> The world will end on Oct 21, 2011 any bets he will be wrong again?\

Unless it is to occur very late in the day, he is already wrong again!

ken

unread,
Oct 21, 2011, 4:31:05 PM10/21/11
to
On Oct 21, 1:28 pm, Uergil <Uer...@uer.net> wrote:
> In article <j7s908$1m6...@adenine.netfront.net>,
>
>
>
>
>
>  "All-Seeing-|" <allseei...@usa.com> wrote:
> > "Devils Advocaat" <mankygo...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>                      Thomas Jefferson- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

He wants to avoid "Rush Hour" on the S F Bay Area Freeways

Ralph

unread,
Oct 21, 2011, 5:37:13 PM10/21/11
to
Yes but by reading the bible Jesus definitely gives the idea that it
would be within a generation of his life.

Apostate

unread,
Oct 21, 2011, 5:58:55 PM10/21/11
to
On Fri, 21 Oct 2011 11:31:02 -0700 (PDT), Devils Advocaat
<manky...@gmail.com> wrote in alt.atheism:
You're all bumin me out.

--
Apostate alt.atheist #1931 SOBWAG #1
BAAWA Knife AND SMASHer freelance Minion #'e'
EAC Deputy Director in Charge of Getting Paid,
Department of Redundancy Department

"The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure
and the intelligent are full of doubt." -- Bertrand Russell

"Mr. Worf, set phasers on "Fuck You" and fire at will."
-- Doc Smartass

"A psychiatrist will be tolerant of your foibles, but a
plastic surgeon will help you pick your nose."
-- Rinaldo of Capadoccia

e-mail to %mynick%periodaaperiod%myAA#%@gee!mail!dottedcommie

Hannele

unread,
Oct 21, 2011, 6:55:39 PM10/21/11
to
On Thu, 20 Oct 2011 02:01:09 +0200, Alex W. <ing...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

> On Thu, 20 Oct 2011 00:25:34 +0200, Hannele wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 18 Oct 2011 02:52:42 +0200, Christopher A. Lee
>> <ca...@optonline.net> wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, 17 Oct 2011 19:38:01 -0500, sbalneav <sbal...@alburg.net>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 11-10-17 04:23 PM, Christopher A. Lee wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 17 Oct 2011 16:11:52 -0500, sbalneav<sbal...@alburg.net>
>>>>
>>>> <snip jabriol's prattle>
>>>>
>>>>>> Red or grey, if you shove a beer can up their heiney,
>>>>>> coat 'em in a mixture of Italian seasoning, onion powder,
>>>>>> garlic powder, salt, and a bit of cayenne pepper, and put
>>>>>> 'em over indirect heat on the BBQ for about 1-3/4 hours,
>>>>>> they're DELICIOUS. For best results, add corn on the cob,
>>>>>> and home-made biscuits! Beer also accompanies this meal
>>>>>> well. For dessert: apple pie& French vanilla ice-cream.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> YUM!
>>>>>
>>>>> I stuff them with chopped bacon, breadcrumbs and mixed Italian herbs
>>>>> (plus egg and milk to bind it) and then pot roast them slowly with
>>>>> tomato, onion and mushroom - plus my own secret: covered with orange
>>>>> slices that disintegrate as it cooks, suffusing the meat with
>>>>> flavour.
>>>>>
>>>>> Pot roasting keeps the meat moist and tender, and the orange,
>>>>> vegetables and meat juice makes a unique and wonderful gravy.
>>>>
>>>> That sounds... completely awesome. Saving this recipe, and the next
>>>> chicken I do (might be a few weeks; I'm out of town on a conference
>>>> next week) I'll let you know how it turns out.
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>>
>>> Remember it's a pot roast - seal it in cooking foil and cook long and
>>> slow.
>>>
>>> If it's done properly it's so tender that when you put it on the
>>> carving tray the wings and legs don't want to come with it.
>>>
>>> The chicken doesn't brown this way so you have to brown it separately.
>>> The British use steel carving trays with little spikes in them to hold
>>> the meat in place, so you cantransfer the chicken to it and put it
>>> back in the oven to brown while you make the gravy in the original
>>> pan.
>>>
>>> If you haven't got one of these, just use a second pan.
>>>
>>> You can cook duck or turkey this way too but the turkey takes a big
>>> pan and lots of foil.
>>>
>>> Even with chicken use two large pieces of foil. One underneath and one
>>> on top, with the edges folded over and brimped together.
>>>
>>> And watch out for steam when you break into it when it's cooked.
>>>
>>> Don't ever let people tell you how bad British cooking is - you won't
>>> get this sort of thing in a restaurant because it takes a lonmg time
>>> to do.
>>>
>>> I cook green vegetables with a small amount of water in the bottom of
>>> a pan, bring to the boi, add the vegetables and cover with a lid. That
>>> way they steam instead of boiling in the water.
>>>
>>> When they're cooked I add what's left of the water into the gravy.
>>>
>>> Good luck....Chris
>>
>> For slow cooking, especially chicken, use a Moroccan tajine, those terra
>> cotta dishes with the large, domed lids. It'll cook slowly and evenly,
>> without drying out, while all the scents and tastes mingle.
>
> Proper ones can be hard to come by. A good alternative is a
> Romertopf, or clay pot. Soak in water before popping it in the
> oven, and any roast will come out sweet and juicy.

I can buy all I want within 5 minutes walking distance, with all the
Turkish, Moroccan and Iranian shops around here. Isn't it great to live in
a multi-cultural society? I always say: when I leave my house I can buy
the whole world! :-D

--
Hannele, A.A #2211

There are at least as many gods as there are believers.

Alex W.

unread,
Oct 21, 2011, 7:25:58 PM10/21/11
to
I don't even need to do that!
I own an internet, I can buy the whole world from the comfort of
my own home!
Even illegal stuff!

Maybe things are different in the Netherlands, but in Britain,
tagine pots have become something of a fashion accessory.
Everybody and their uncle makes them (more often than not in
China), and this makes it less than easy to track down the real
thing. Gotta love globalisation...


Loirbaj

unread,
Oct 21, 2011, 7:26:38 PM10/21/11
to
Darwin's Theory of Inheritance (Pangenesis) WRONG
Darwin's Theory of Atoll Formation WRONG
Darwin's Theory of Earth Worm Movement WRONG
Darwin's Theory of Origin of Species WRONG
Darwin's Theory of Peacock Coloration WRONG
Darwin's Theory of Denudation of the Weald WRONG
Darwin's Theory of Man had a tail WRONG
Darwin's Theory of Bear evolving to Whales WRONG

Soren Baker Mulletien said,
So what if Darwin cranked out bogus
theories faster than Dawkins sells schlock
CDs to the gullible.

Alex W.

unread,
Oct 21, 2011, 7:28:02 PM10/21/11
to
A tanker trailer should be big enough.

Or wait until one of the disposable fuel tanks from an Apollo
rocket drops in your back yard.

VoiceOfReason

unread,
Oct 21, 2011, 7:49:05 PM10/21/11
to
On Oct 21, 7:26 pm, Loirbaj <Rhodi...@wmconnect.com> wrote:

Silence, child -- the adults are talking food.

Doc Smartass

unread,
Oct 21, 2011, 9:00:27 PM10/21/11
to
Loirbaj <Rhod...@wmconnect.com> wrote in news:5aa39292-09fb-4769-bcda-
204a07...@h14g2000yqi.googlegroups.com:

> R<SMACK>

Sorry, this isn't your thread anymore. Get out.

--
Doc Smartass, BAAWA Knight of Aimin' to Misbehave aa # 1939

Kooks! http://kookclearinghouse.blogspot.com/

Books! http://jw-bookblog.blogspot.com/

Tea Parties are for little kids.

Doc Smartass

unread,
Oct 21, 2011, 9:01:46 PM10/21/11
to
John Baker <nu...@bizniz.net> wrote in
news:4u83a75kc77837o1s...@4ax.com:
The shell with this!

AllSeeing-I

unread,
Oct 21, 2011, 11:31:17 PM10/21/11
to
Yes, as a matter of fact, it does. You have posted on this a couple of
time and in the past. If you understood there weould be "false
prachers," this would not be a sticking point for you.


> You should be more concerned for those Christians who were taken in
> before and will be taken in again.

I am concerned. However, God has already said some of his people will
perish because of lack of knowledge. False teachers like Camping are
predicted to come in the bible.


> > You
> > would already know that he will be wrong each and every time he makes one of his stupid
> > predictions.
>
> I guess you didn't read my post carefully enough did you maddy?

I read it perfectly.

> > Jesus said, No one knows the day of the hour. Simple, eh?
>
> So you should be talking to those who take end of the world
> predictions seriously.

Poor DA just can seem to grasp what is taking place. The end is
coming.
Jesus said no one would know the day, or the hour. That makes camping
wrong --not Jesus.

> I don't take them seriously at all.

Neither do I. But, how can I know which ones are speaking real
prophesy,
then? Here is how. They will not be declairing a specific day or hour.
Why? Because no one knows they day or the hour. We only know the
season, generation,era.

Really, DA. Try to raise your level of thinking so you can grasp this.
The
end is for certain. Do you wish to get left behind?

> And I haven't been taken in by this idiot Harold Camping either.

Good for you. Now, when are you going to not get taken in by heathen
nonsense and find out for yourself exactly what the bible says?

You do want to be prepared, right?


Uergil

unread,
Oct 21, 2011, 11:43:58 PM10/21/11
to
In article
<1503acff-7c41-46af...@c1g2000vbw.googlegroups.com>,
Loirbaj <Rhod...@wmconnect.com> wrote:


Liarbaj agrees:
> It's highly plausible that in the universe there are God-like
> creatures. It零 very important to understand that they all came into
> being by an EXPLICABLE SCIENTIFIC PROGRESSION OF INCREMENTAL
> EVOLUTION.- Richard Dawkins

Uergil

unread,
Oct 22, 2011, 12:01:02 AM10/22/11
to
In article
<4bbdb7c6-7251-40f0...@g7g2000vbv.googlegroups.com>,
AllSeeing-I <allse...@usa.com> wrote:

> Good for you. Now, when are you going to not get taken in by heathen
> nonsense and find out for yourself exactly what the bible says?


I have read enough of the bible to know that it is unreliable as a
source of facts, however good it may be considered as a source of
morality.

chibiabos

unread,
Oct 22, 2011, 12:31:43 PM10/22/11
to
In article
<06708bfb-b5f6-4ebe...@x16g2000prd.googlegroups.com>,
SkyEyes <skye...@cox.net> wrote:

> On Oct 19, 6:42 pm, chibiabos <c...@nospam.com> wrote:
> > In article <5hgj8pd1uapw$.1pk1dlajoo7or....@40tude.net>, Alex W.
> >
> > <ing...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> > > Oh, and do save the fat.  Either duck or goose fat are a msot
> > > excellent and tasty substitute for butter or lard when frying
> > > potatoes.
> >
> > I make beurre manie from the fat. These are grape-sized balls made from
> > equal parts fat and flour (just mix the two together to the consistency
> > of Pla-Doh and form into small balls). The beurre manie can be frozen
> > for later use. Pop one or two out of the freezer and into the pot to
> > thicken a sauce or a soup.
> >
> > (Technically, buerre manie is made from butter and flour, hence
> > "buerre," but fats from roast fowl work just as well and with more
> > flavor, IMO.)
>
> Transcribing this technique into my own cooking notes. Thank you!

Welcome!

There are a couple of caveats to using Beurre Manie. The first is, this
isn't an "instant" thickener like cornstarch and water. It often takes
15-30 minutes for thickening to begin. When thickening takes so long,
the tendency is to throw more beurre manie into the pot until, when it
finally starts to thicken, you've added too much!

The second is, don't put beurre manie into soups or gravies that are at
the boiling point. If you do, you'll end up with dumplings instead of a
thickener. (Dense, heavy dumplings that sink to the bottom, not light
and fluffy dumplings that float to the top). Always start with stock
that is well below the boiling point but warm enough to melt the fat in
the beurre manie.

Good eating!

-chib

--
Member of S.M.A.S.H.
Sarcastic Middle-aged Atheists with a Sense of Humor

Hannele

unread,
Oct 23, 2011, 6:08:38 PM10/23/11
to
On Sat, 22 Oct 2011 01:25:58 +0200, Alex W. <ing...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

> On Sat, 22 Oct 2011 00:55:39 +0200, Hannele wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 20 Oct 2011 02:01:09 +0200, Alex W. <ing...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 20 Oct 2011 00:25:34 +0200, Hannele wrote:
>>>
<snip>
>>>>
>>>> For slow cooking, especially chicken, use a Moroccan tajine, those
>>>> terra
>>>> cotta dishes with the large, domed lids. It'll cook slowly and evenly,
>>>> without drying out, while all the scents and tastes mingle.
>>>
>>> Proper ones can be hard to come by. A good alternative is a
>>> Romertopf, or clay pot. Soak in water before popping it in the
>>> oven, and any roast will come out sweet and juicy.
>>
>> I can buy all I want within 5 minutes walking distance, with all the
>> Turkish, Moroccan and Iranian shops around here. Isn't it great to live
>> in
>> a multi-cultural society? I always say: when I leave my house I can buy
>> the whole world! :-D
>
> I don't even need to do that!
> I own an internet, I can buy the whole world from the comfort of
> my own home!
> Even illegal stuff!
>
> Maybe things are different in the Netherlands, but in Britain,
> tagine pots have become something of a fashion accessory.
> Everybody and their uncle makes them (more often than not in
> China), and this makes it less than easy to track down the real
> thing. Gotta love globalisation...
>
I prefer brick and mortar shops, because I like to see what I buy, for
just about anything but products (books) I've already checked out, but
that is just a preference.

And yes, tajines are a bit of a fashion accessory here as well, I've even
seen metal ones! :-( How weird is that? The ones I've bought are the real
deal though, as bought by my Moroccan neighbours as well, I prefer the
domed tops, because they fit a whole chicken better. And, contrary to
Römertopfs, they can go on the hob, as long as you're cooking with gas. :-)
Hmm, time for some chicken and lemon again, one of the best dishes ever,
or perhaps beef, courgettes and oregano.

Father Haskell

unread,
Oct 23, 2011, 6:10:06 PM10/23/11
to
> R mertopfs, they can go on the hob, as long as you're cooking with gas. :-)
> Hmm, time for some chicken and lemon again, one of the best dishes ever,  
> or perhaps beef, courgettes and oregano.

I'm cheap. I'd try to make one from a couple of
terra cotta flower pots.

Alex W.

unread,
Oct 24, 2011, 6:03:31 AM10/24/11
to
Even for books -- what you cannot get online is the personal
relationship and service.


>
> And yes, tajines are a bit of a fashion accessory here as well, I've even
> seen metal ones! :-( How weird is that? The ones I've bought are the real
> deal though, as bought by my Moroccan neighbours as well, I prefer the
> domed tops, because they fit a whole chicken better. And, contrary to
> Römertopfs, they can go on the hob, as long as you're cooking with gas. :-)
> Hmm, time for some chicken and lemon again, one of the best dishes ever,
> or perhaps beef, courgettes and oregano.

I don't cook with gas, alas. The advantages of gas are
well-known to me, but being utterly anosmic, the risk of having
gas in my flat is too great.

Chicken and lemon sounds excellent, but you are far from limited
to Moroccan dishes! Have you ever tried making something like
Hasenpfeffer (sp?) in your tagine dish?

Hannele

unread,
Oct 24, 2011, 7:00:31 PM10/24/11
to
That's a word I don't hear every day, I had to look it up. But yeah, I can
see why it would be a risk for you.
>
> Chicken and lemon sounds excellent, but you are far from limited
> to Moroccan dishes!

I know I'm not limited, but I have such great Moroccan recipes that I
love. Only trouble is that I'm living with 2 non meat eaters, so a lot of
them tend to not get cooked. This weekend though I plan on cooking just
for me and storing portions in the freezer.

> Have you ever tried making something like
> Hasenpfeffer (sp?) in your tagine dish?

I wouldn't know where to get hare, but it surely is a great idea. :-D I'll
look into it. That or any kind of casserole should work fine.

panamfloyd@hotmail.com rade

unread,
Oct 24, 2011, 7:08:31 PM10/24/11
to
On Oct 22, 12:31 pm, chibiabos <c...@nospam.com> wrote:
> In article
> <06708bfb-b5f6-4ebe-b580-ec50061bf...@x16g2000prd.googlegroups.com>,
I might try making beurre manie. My parents are from Louisiana, my mom
just always made roux instead. But I'm lazier than she is, so...<g>

-Panama Floyd, Atlanta.
aa#2015/KoBAAWA!

Apostate

unread,
Oct 24, 2011, 7:20:08 PM10/24/11
to
On Tue, 25 Oct 2011 01:00:31 +0200, Hannele <han...@lycos.nl> wrote
in alt.atheism:
I've been contemplating buying a tajine for most of a year.
It would be a solid, if you'd share those recipes.

Hannele

unread,
Oct 24, 2011, 7:35:34 PM10/24/11
to
On Tue, 25 Oct 2011 01:20:08 +0200, Apostate <godless...@yeehaw.org>
wrote:
I wouldn't mind, they never were mine anyway, but it will take some time,
since they're all in Dutch, so I'll need to translate them. What kind of
recipes would you particularly like? Beef, lamb, chicken, fish,
vegetables, all of them?

Apostate

unread,
Oct 24, 2011, 8:04:37 PM10/24/11
to
On Tue, 25 Oct 2011 01:35:34 +0200, Hannele <han...@lycos.nl> wrote
I have to admit to being more oriented toward mammal cannibalism than
vegetarianism, although a truly tasty vegetable recipe would also be
most welcome. Take your time. The lard knows, I wouldn't be able to
make sense out of them in Dutch.

TIA!

Olrik

unread,
Oct 24, 2011, 11:32:47 PM10/24/11
to
Make sure to eat it fast. Remember: Hare today, gone tomorrow.

(Stolen from Bugs Bunny, I think)

walks...@dirty.deeds.done.dirt.cheap.llc

unread,
Oct 25, 2011, 12:49:07 AM10/25/11
to
In <op.v3vou...@laptophannele.lan>, on 10/25/11
at 01:00 AM, Hannele <han...@lycos.nl> said:



>On Mon, 24 Oct 2011 12:03:31 +0200, Alex W. <ing...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

>> On Mon, 24 Oct 2011 00:08:38 +0200, Hannele wrote:

snip

>I know I'm not limited, but I have such great Moroccan recipes that I
>love. Only trouble is that I'm living with 2 non meat eaters, so a lot of
> them tend to not get cooked. This weekend though I plan on cooking just
> for me and storing portions in the freezer.


If you don't have one, you may want to invest in a vacuum sealer. Akward, bulky, & take up space. But tommorrow I will be makeing beef stew from a slab of beef that is about 4 years old. Still good & no freezer burn.
Using one of those beats the hell out of canning in the summer.

>> Have you ever tried making something like
>> Hasenpfeffer (sp?) in your tagine dish?

>I wouldn't know where to get hare, but it surely is a great idea. :-D
>I'll look into it. That or any kind of casserole should work fine.

walksalone who does bachelor style cooking, if it doesn't make it to the floor on its own, it's mine.



Wombat

unread,
Oct 25, 2011, 1:45:46 AM10/25/11
to
On Oct 25, 1:00 am, Hannele <hann...@lycos.nl> wrote:

snip

>
> > I don't cook with gas, alas.  The advantages of gas are
> > well-known to me, but being utterly anosmic, the risk of having
> > gas in my flat is too great.
>
> That's a word I don't hear every day, I had to look it up. But yeah, I can  
> see why it would be a risk for you.
>
>
>
> > Chicken and lemon sounds excellent, but you are far from limited
> > to Moroccan dishes!
>
> I know I'm not limited, but I have such great Moroccan recipes that I  
> love. Only trouble is that I'm living with 2 non meat eaters, so a lot of  
> them tend to not get cooked. This weekend though I plan on cooking just  
> for me and storing portions in the freezer.
>
> > Have you ever tried making something like
> > Hasenpfeffer (sp?) in your tagine dish?
>
> I wouldn't know where to get hare, but it surely is a great idea. :-D I'll  
> look into it. That or any kind of casserole should work fine.

We have hares living in the fields here just north of Amsterdam. The
farmers go out and shoot them. I'm sure they would sell you one if
you asked them nicely.

Wombat

Alex W.

unread,
Oct 25, 2011, 5:23:56 AM10/25/11
to
What are you rabbitting on about?

Alex W.

unread,
Oct 25, 2011, 5:27:50 AM10/25/11
to
On Mon, 24 Oct 2011 23:49:07 -0500,
walks...@dirty.deeds.done.dirt.cheap.LLC wrote:

> In <op.v3vou...@laptophannele.lan>, on 10/25/11
> at 01:00 AM, Hannele <han...@lycos.nl> said:
>
>
>
>>On Mon, 24 Oct 2011 12:03:31 +0200, Alex W. <ing...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>> On Mon, 24 Oct 2011 00:08:38 +0200, Hannele wrote:
>
> snip
>
>>I know I'm not limited, but I have such great Moroccan recipes that I
>>love. Only trouble is that I'm living with 2 non meat eaters, so a lot of
>> them tend to not get cooked. This weekend though I plan on cooking just
>> for me and storing portions in the freezer.
>
>
> If you don't have one, you may want to invest in a vacuum sealer. Akward, bulky, & take up space. But tommorrow I will be makeing beef stew from a slab of beef that is about 4 years old. Still good & no freezer burn.
> Using one of those beats the hell out of canning in the summer.

I have seen small vacuum sealing machines that are the size of a
very compact printer. For purely occasional and domestic use, a
small one would suffice, I would have thought.

For me, the biggest stumbling block with vacuum sealers -- I
considered them once for my cigars -- is the cost of the plastic.
Normal freezer bags wont do, you have to have special heavy-duty
plastic bags, and they are comparatively expensive.

Alex W.

unread,
Oct 25, 2011, 6:34:43 AM10/25/11
to
Not to mention my neighbours...
;-)


>>
>> Chicken and lemon sounds excellent, but you are far from limited
>> to Moroccan dishes!
>
> I know I'm not limited, but I have such great Moroccan recipes that I
> love. Only trouble is that I'm living with 2 non meat eaters, so a lot of
> them tend to not get cooked. This weekend though I plan on cooking just
> for me and storing portions in the freezer.

In which case, I can highly recommend ratatouille and couscous.
Vegetarian, and still tasty!

BTW, did you know that "vegetarian" is an old Indian word meaning
"bad hunter"?


>
>> Have you ever tried making something like
>> Hasenpfeffer (sp?) in your tagine dish?
>
> I wouldn't know where to get hare, but it surely is a great idea. :-D I'll
> look into it. That or any kind of casserole should work fine.

It may be worth looking up vegetarian casseroles which you can
then turn into a real dish by adding meatballs or sausage for
yourself.

But I'm sure you already thought of that.

walks...@dirty.deeds.done.dirt.cheap.llc

unread,
Oct 25, 2011, 8:27:40 AM10/25/11
to
In <1pkga6ia31c0p.1v0zk40rggnya$.d...@40tude.net>, on 10/25/11
at 10:27 AM, "Alex W." <ing...@yahoo.co.uk> said:



>On Mon, 24 Oct 2011 23:49:07 -0500,
>walks...@dirty.deeds.done.dirt.cheap.LLC wrote:

>> In <op.v3vou...@laptophannele.lan>, on 10/25/11
>> at 01:00 AM, Hannele <han...@lycos.nl> said:
>>

snip

>> If you don't have one, you may want to invest in a vacuum sealer. Akward, bulky, & take up space. But tommorrow I will be makeing beef stew from a slab of beef that is about 4 years old. Still good & no freezer burn.
>> Using one of those beats the hell out of canning in the summer.

>I have seen small vacuum sealing machines that are the size of a very
>compact printer. For purely occasional and domestic use, a small one
>would suffice, I would have thought.

Surprising what one can do with the proper one. Everything from food to small valuables & tools.

>For me, the biggest stumbling block with vacuum sealers -- I considered
>them once for my cigars -- is the cost of the plastic. Normal freezer
>bags wont do, you have to have special heavy-duty plastic bags, and they
>are comparatively expensive.

Now there you have said a true thing most of the time. Iuse thre units, a small 11" snorkel type [uses roll or plain plastic bags] for light work. A chamber vacuum setup for largish stiff, say around 12x12".
Then I have what I suspect you are talking about, the pleated bags.
Typically, I spend about 11cents US per foot, size immaterial. But then, I buy in bulk, say 100+ft. rolls.
Now I did get carried away with it, but it has been one of the best purchases I've made in years.
BTW, re:cigars, not the best idea. You need some air in the pack, & vacuum sealing can draw to much air out. It could be done, & I am sure someone does, say a box at a time.

An advantage, in your case, I've never seen a recipe for canned cigars.

For an investment of about $140, US & up depending on what you are going to do with it, it can be a good investment in saviong time & foodstuffs.
I can in no way recommend one of the depatment store varieties, for they are not that flexible nor at that price, can they be.


walksalone who bought a toy, & found a very useful tool.

Ridiculous inded, but I did an experiment of vacuum packing one Muncho[1] ship in a 12" bag, & it worked.

[1] A cornstarch snackfood that is not worth the money. But the chips are thin & weak, & I wanted to know.

Mike Painter

unread,
Oct 26, 2011, 9:00:25 PM10/26/11
to
On 10/24/2011 4:00 PM, Hannele wrote:
>>> <snip>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> For slow cooking, especially chicken, use a Moroccan tajine, those
>>>>>>> terra
>>>>>>> cotta dishes with the large, domed lids. It'll cook slowly and
>>>>>>> evenly,
>>>>>>> without drying out, while all the scents and tastes mingle.
>>>>>>
We build a charcoal fire at the bottom of 55 gal FOOD GRADE barrels,
suspend 15-18 half chickens (rubbed with something. Garlic and lemon
salt is pretty good) from coat hangers and rebar at the top and walk
away for three hours.
They have to be removed carefully because the chicken will fall off the
bone. Simple and amazingly good.
We always sell out early - and we usually do 10 barrels at a time.

A good and big convection oven is almost as good and much faster.

Alex W.

unread,
Oct 27, 2011, 7:50:28 PM10/27/11
to
On Wed, 26 Oct 2011 18:00:25 -0700, Mike Painter wrote:


>
> A good and big convection oven is almost as good and much faster.

Nothing wrong with a convection oven, but "faster" is not much of
a recommendation, IMO. Meat will generally be tastier when done
slowly. Frex, I won't roast a leg of lamb or brisket of beef at
anything more than 220-250 degrees (Fahrenheit, that is) -- it
may take four hours for the lamb, but the meat is that much more
tender and flavoursome than blitzing it with volcanic heat.

Mike Painter

unread,
Oct 28, 2011, 8:35:18 PM10/28/11
to
Four hours in a barrel or twenty minutes in a convection oven yields
essentially the same degree of tenderness and juiciness according to
the people that eat it.

Alex W.

unread,
Oct 29, 2011, 8:32:00 AM10/29/11
to
Maybe your ovens are different from ours.
I find that special care has to be taken with convection ovens
because of a tendency of the meat to dry out. That's why we
usually do our Xmas roasts in an old-fashioned wood-fired
cast-iron oven (or, in the case of one friend, in a brick baker's
kiln).

Loirbaj

unread,
Oct 31, 2011, 3:53:27 AM10/31/11
to

SkyEyes

unread,
Oct 31, 2011, 4:10:16 AM10/31/11
to
On Oct 20, 2:39 am, Loirbaj <Rhodi...@wmconnect.com> wrote:
> Rather, my (long series of) posts show that time
> after time 'Darwin had a theory' which was wrong.
> Darwin's Theory of Inheritance (Pangenesis) WRONG
> Darwin's Theory of Atoll Formation               WRONG
> Darwin's Theory of Earth Worm Movement    WRONG
> Darwin's Theory of Origin of Species             WRONG

No, actually, it's quite correct.

> Darwin's Theory of Peacock Coloration          WRONG
> Darwin's Theory of Denudation of the Weald   WRONG
> Darwin's Theory of Man had a tail                  WRONG

Yet human babies are born with rudimentary tales. My ex-husband was
born with a 2" long tail, which the doctors immediately removed. The
scars, however, are still there.

> Darwin's Theory of Bear evolving to Whales    WRONG

So what? He was guessing at a lot of it, and he 'fessed up that he
was guessing. Now, 150 years later, we have corrected many of his
erroneous guesses. However, his basic theory has held up well over
the years, even to the point of a nice degree of consilience with the
new science of genetics.

So poor you. Science has moved on in 150 years, but the evidence for
evolution just keeps piling up.
>
> It's highly plausible that in the universe there
> are God-like creatures. - Richard Dawkins

Yes. "God-like" is NOT equal to "God." "Any sufficiently advanced
technology is indistinguishable from magic." (Arthur C. Clark). All
Dawkins was saying was that it's possible that there are natural
creatures (not supernatural) somewhere in the universe, whose
technology is so advanced that it would seem to us as though they were
gods. That's a long sight from believing in the bible god. Not the
same thing *at all*.

Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34
BAAWA Knight of the Golden Litterbox
EAC Professor of Feline Thermometrics and Cat-Herding
skyeyes nine at cox dot net OR
skyeyes nine at yahoo dot com

rincewind

unread,
Oct 31, 2011, 5:52:57 AM10/31/11
to
Still waiting for you to show me how two people populated the world.
And how that would work from a genetic point of view.
And where all the people Cain was afraid of came from.

Jason

unread,
Oct 31, 2011, 3:35:00 PM10/31/11
to
In article
<84387e57-19b2-4433...@1g2000vbx.googlegroups.com>, Loirbaj
They are now claiming that a Wolf-like creature evolved into a whale.


It is loading more messages.
0 new messages