I have a nice top sirloin beef roast

On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 19:38:41 -0500, no_time_to_hurry wrote:


If its a whole are large cut (6-12lbs) you roast it low and slow until
medium or med-rare and serve as thin or thick sliced with other
roasted vegetables. With plenty of leftover for french dips and other
kinds of roast beef sandwiches (with brie is good).

-sw
 
On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 19:38:41 -0500, no_time_to_hurry wrote:


If its a whole are large cut (6-12lbs) you roast it low and slow until
medium or med-rare and serve as thin or thick sliced with other
roasted vegetables. With plenty of leftover for french dips and other
kinds of roast beef sandwiches (with brie is good).

-sw
 
On Sat, 19 Feb 2011 02:34:18 -0800, Kent wrote:


Chateaubriand


I thought you were some sort of French chef, having been an expert at
it by visiting France once a couple decades ago?

Stop throwing around these French terms like you know what they mean.
You keep calling anything cooked at a low temperature "sous vide", and
that is not sous vide cooking. Not even close. You're missing twop
of the three most important two elements of sous vide: vacuum (to
seal in natural juices and pull flavor into the meat) and water bath
(to conduct heat evenly and thoroughly).

You just keep getting dumber by the day, Kent. Stop spreading your
misinformation.

-sw
 
On Sat, 19 Feb 2011 02:34:18 -0800, Kent wrote:


Chateaubriand


I thought you were some sort of French chef, having been an expert at
it by visiting France once a couple decades ago?

Stop throwing around these French terms like you know what they mean.
You keep calling anything cooked at a low temperature "sous vide", and
that is not sous vide cooking. Not even close. You're missing twop
of the three most important two elements of sous vide: vacuum (to
seal in natural juices and pull flavor into the meat) and water bath
(to conduct heat evenly and thoroughly).

You just keep getting dumber by the day, Kent. Stop spreading your
misinformation.

-sw
 
In article ,
"jmcquown" wrote:


To give it a little better flavor. This stuff was canned and frozen a
long time ago, so it needs a little help. So should he slice or grate
them?

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA
[email protected]
 
In article ,
"jmcquown" wrote:


To give it a little better flavor. This stuff was canned and frozen a
long time ago, so it needs a little help. So should he slice or grate
them?

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA
[email protected]
 
In article ,
"Kent" wrote:





I can just imagine Kent's brother: "Kent, you aren't going to get a
very high heat from your fridge. Why don't you try using your stove?".

:-)



Here's what Google told me:

What is the difference between hard science and soft science?
soft science is science that is not hard easy hard science is not easy
like if you are in a advanced class that is hard science

Read more:
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_difference_between_hard_science_and
_soft_science_and_where_does_psychology_fit#ixzz1EYaTiQld

[end quote]

There were also a bunch of hits about "hard science fiction".

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA
[email protected]
 
In article ,
"Kent" wrote:





I can just imagine Kent's brother: "Kent, you aren't going to get a
very high heat from your fridge. Why don't you try using your stove?".

:-)



Here's what Google told me:

What is the difference between hard science and soft science?
soft science is science that is not hard easy hard science is not easy
like if you are in a advanced class that is hard science

Read more:
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_difference_between_hard_science_and
_soft_science_and_where_does_psychology_fit#ixzz1EYaTiQld

[end quote]

There were also a bunch of hits about "hard science fiction".

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA
[email protected]
 
Hard and soft science
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Hard science)
Jump to: navigation, search
Hard science and soft science are colloquial terms often used when comparing
fields of academic research or scholarship, with hard meaning perceived as
being more scientific, rigorous, or accurate. Fields of the natural,
physical sciences, or computing sciences are often described as hard, while
the social sciences and similar fields are often described as soft.[1] The
hard sciences are characterized as relying on experimental, empirical,
quantifiable data, relying on the scientific method, and focusing on
accuracy and objectivity.[2] Publications in the hard sciences such as
natural sciences make heavier use of graphs than soft sciences such as
sociology, according to the graphism thesis.

"Dan Abel" wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
 
wrote:


You're simply an ignorant bastard too LAZY to type *garlic* cloves. In
parts of the planet where cloves are grown all sorts of meat including
beef is studded with whole cloves... but not in your narrow TIAD
world, JERK!@.

Did ya know that next to Bwrrryan and Bwrrrruce... Harrrrrvey is 'bout
the gayest name there is.

And like ALL faggots Harrrrrvey LIES... type "cloves" into wiki
search: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloves
 
On Tue, 22 Feb 2011 04:38:22 -0500, no_time_to_hurry
wrote:


Slow heat is 300 or less, depending on how slowly you want to cook it.

--

Today's mighty oak is just yesterday's nut that held its ground.
 
On Tue, 22 Feb 2011 04:36:20 -0500, no_time_to_hurry
wrote:


You had the context of knowing she was talking about a head of garlic.

--

Today's mighty oak is just yesterday's nut that held its ground.
 
Hard and soft science
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Hard science)
Jump to: navigation, search
Hard science and soft science are colloquial terms often used when comparing
fields of academic research or scholarship, with hard meaning perceived as
being more scientific, rigorous, or accurate. Fields of the natural,
physical sciences, or computing sciences are often described as hard, while
the social sciences and similar fields are often described as soft.[1] The
hard sciences are characterized as relying on experimental, empirical,
quantifiable data, relying on the scientific method, and focusing on
accuracy and objectivity.[2] Publications in the hard sciences such as
natural sciences make heavier use of graphs than soft sciences such as
sociology, according to the graphism thesis.

"Dan Abel" wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
 
Back
Top