Woo.

[SHaYap]

Just now, Mr Walker said:

No it was clever pun, along the lines of the one which, if you are honest and clever, you used yourself with the word marronostic.    I will let the lobster simmer for a while before explaining it to you   

Nope , it was not clever, honestly, and I am clever enough to tell the difference, uhmmm .... you don't simmer lobsters, you boil them ... then lightly seared in butter

Your punt at punning failed

~

[Mr Walker]

15 minutes ago, third_eye said:

Nope , it was not clever, honestly, and I am clever enough to tell the difference, uhmmm .... you don't simmer lobsters, you boil them ... then lightly seared in butter

Your punt at punning failed

~

ah but to give you long enough to work out my "riddle"  this poor lobster must be simmered  As you don't yet know what my pun is you cant know if it is clever.

Do you  mean you did not mean to be clever with your own play on words?  I thought it was quite clever, even if it was accidental (Unless you knew that i followed a basically marronite christian lifestyle and don't eat  the biblical proscribed foods. If so, then it was deliberately clever and insulting )   

Ps all jokes aside Lobsters or cray fish, as well as crabs and prawns, are better cooked at a simmer than a boil The flesh stays softer and retains its taste. Sea water is the optimal

But you are correct butter is nice and doesn't spoil the delicate flavour of crayfish . The best condiments however are vinegar and salt   All other sauces ruin the unique and special taste. 

As a young person we lived a lot from sea food and over the summer, especially, ate dozens of cray fish.   From memory, crabs were more of a winter dish, and yabbies or   marron (ironic name hey) were taken in any month with an R in it.  

Edited March 11, 2019 by Mr Walker

[SHaYap]

Just now, Mr Walker said:

ah but to give you long enough to work out my "riddle"  this poor lobster must be simmered  As you don't yet know what my pun is you cant know if it is clever.

Sorry to say your reach for cleverness is riddled with more that is contradictory to all things bright, not so unusual for your muddled state of mental state under all your subterfuge of lies

~

Just now, Mr Walker said:

Do you  mean you did not mean to be clever with your own play on words?  I thought it was quite clever, even if it was accidental (Unless you knew that i followed a basically marronite christian lifestyle and don't eat  the biblical proscribed foods. If so, then it was deliberately clever and insulting )     

You got yourself entangled in such a slip knot of wayward guile it would make any self respecting and frustrated Rabbi shave the beard just to 'why not' give up the celibate life.

Giving up the biblical proscribed foods is your idea of clever ... “oy vey iz mir”

NOw that's a riddle for you

~

[Habitat]

Don't be shellfish gentlemen.

[Mr Walker]

3 minutes ago, third_eye said:

Sorry to say your reach for cleverness is riddled with more that is contradictory to all things bright, not so unusual for your muddled state of mental state under all your subterfuge of lies

~

You got yourself entangled in such a slip knot of wayward guile it would make any self respecting and frustrated Rabbi shave the beard just to 'why not' give up the celibate life.

Giving up the biblical proscribed foods is your idea of clever ... “oy vey iz mir”

NOw that's a riddle for you

 

~

Sorry it may be your syntax but you aren't making sense 

I never gave up the biblically proscribed foods I was raised an atheist secular humanist/  general omnivore, eating any food we could afford,  but I TOOK up the biblical rules  in my twenties   Largely because of the proven health benefits of such a diet  I haven't  eaten any of the proscribed foods for 40 years, except, where to refuse, would have insulted a host 

Oh woe is me.

I wonder what that old jewish/yiddish  saying could mean

 ikh hab es bakumen 

It is interesting how close to German a lot of yiddish is. 

[SHaYap]

Just now, Mr Walker said:

Sorry it may be your syntax but you aren't making sense 

Are you trying to distract the lobster or the shellfish ?

~

Just now, Mr Walker said:

I never gave up the biblically proscribed foods I was raised an atheist secular humanist/  general omnivore, eating any food we could afford,  but I TOOK up the biblical rules  in my twenties   Largely because of the proven health benefits of such a diet  I haven't  eaten any of the proscribed foods for 40 years, except, where to refuse, would have insulted a host 

Rather irrelevant to your present state of a failure for congruence isn't it ?

~

Just now, Mr Walker said:

Oh woe is me.

I wonder what that old jewish/yiddish  saying could mean

 ikh hab es bakumen 

It is interesting how close to German a lot of yiddish is. 

Or maybe it is how close to hebrew / yiddish , a lot of what is Germanic, was ...

~

[Mr Walker]

12 minutes ago, third_eye said:

Are you trying to distract the lobster or the shellfish ?

~

Rather irrelevant to your present state of a failure for congruence isn't it ?

~

Or maybe it is how close to hebrew / yiddish , a lot of what is Germanic, was ...

~

Again, your first two replies make no sense

Your last is interesting but Yiddish picked up some southern   German dialect  when the jews spent time in Germany (later they also added some Slavic  language) Yiddish also included some Romany and actual Jewish words (naturally)   Thus german is one root language of yiddish, not the other way around.

My point was that i could decipher your riddle, not because i knew yiddish, but because i knew enough German to recognise the words.   

[Mr Walker]

37 minutes ago, Habitat said:

Don't be shellfish gentlemen.

I won't, if no one comes the raw prawn with me. 

But I  wont crawfish, either.  

Edited March 11, 2019 by Mr Walker

[SHaYap]

58 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

Again, your first two replies make no sense

Doesn't say much about your claims to all things profundity  and not quite as sagacious as you keep insisting on your behalf

~

58 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

Your last is interesting but Yiddish picked up some southern   German dialect  when the jews spent time in Germany (later they also added some Slavic  language) Yiddish also included some Romany and actual Jewish words (naturally)   Thus german is one root language of yiddish, not the other way around.

Seems to me you are lost in your desperate meandering to clamber a way out from your rendering of what makes for vernacular and language with some foggy extractions sieved from your fact of mists

~

58 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

My point was that i could decipher your riddle, not because i knew yiddish, but because i knew enough German to recognise the words.   

Doesn't prove anything substantial or contrary and what's more, totally irrelevant to your claims in regards to what you profess as your claims for acuity as well

~

[Habitat]

Just now, third_eye said:

your fact of mists

Ahhh ! the old "fact of mists". This is why I keep saying we have a minor language issue here, leading to meaning being lost in a "mist of facts".

[SHaYap]

Just now, Habitat said:

Ahhh ! the old "fact of mists". This is why I keep saying we have a minor language issue here, leading to meaning being lost in a "mist of facts".

Like I said, you lack the means to comprehend the subtleties with your head so engrossed in chasing your own tail ... fact of mists in relation to fogginess is what I meant, you want a tummy tickle to make you feel better ?

~

[Habitat]

2 minutes ago, third_eye said:

Like I said, you lack the means to comprehend the subtleties with your head so engrossed in chasing your own tail ... fact of mists in relation to fogginess is what I meant, you want a tummy tickle to make you feel better ?

~

Of course you did ! He does have a fact of mists ! Just like I have a fact of doubts that you are being truthful !

[danydandan]

Jesus guy's! Any chance you'd like to stop the p***ing contest and swing back on topic?

[Mr Walker]

1 hour ago, third_eye said:

Doesn't say much about your claims to all things profundity  and not quite as sagacious as you keep insisting on your behalf

~

Seems to me you are lost in your desperate meandering to clamber a way out from your rendering of what makes for vernacular and language with some foggy extractions sieved from your fact of mists

~

Doesn't prove anything substantial or contrary and what's more, totally irrelevant to your claims in regards to what you profess as your claims for acuity as well

~

You just use meaningless words in meaningless sentences. It is often  not possible to decipher any meaning because there  is none.  You make up stuff Eg ive never claimed profundity. In general I write as a speak, simple clear, but at my level of education For example your second sentence here has no reference to any specific subject  it sounds  profound  and intelligent but has no meaning, as it is written  it also uses mixed metaphors whic make it unintelligible  eg  you dont meander a clamber from  a rendering.  It is just physically impossible  You can not sieve foggy extractions from,  mists either  It simply does not hold water 

[Mr Walker]

38 minutes ago, danydandan said:

Jesus guy's! Any chance you'd like to stop the p***ing contest and swing back on topic?

Probably not, but i appreciate  your brevity, simple language, and use of proper sentence structure  

[Habitat]

16 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

You just use meaningless words in meaningless sentences. It is often  not possible to decipher any meaning because there  is none.  You make up stuff Eg ive never claimed profundity. In general I write as a speak, simple clear, but at my level of education For example your second sentence here has no reference to any specific subject  it sounds  profound  and intelligent but has no meaning, as it is written  it also uses mixed metaphors whic make it unintelligible  eg  you dont meander a clamber from  a rendering.  It is just physically impossible  You can not sieve foggy extractions from,  mists either  It simply does not hold water 

3 eyes badly needs to read up on the KISS principle, and apply forthwith. I understand there are language problems, but the best way around that is not migraine-inducing gobbledegook. Simplicity will suffice.

[Habitat]

I recall when the TV newsreader announced that some unfortunate had been bitten on the funnel by a finger-web spider, to great gales of laughter across the nation, but that is now lost in the mists of quirky broadcasting facts and incidents. ( Hint: there is a creature called a Funnel-Web Spider). I'm sure 3 eyes appreciates the humour.

[Saru]

Let's keep it civil and on-topic please folks.

[Habitat]

2 minutes ago, Saru said:

Let's keep it civil and on-topic please folks.

Perish the thought that we would ever depart from that !

[SHaYap]

1 hour ago, Habitat said:

Of course you did ! He does have a fact of mists ! Just like I have a fact of doubts that you are being truthful !

And you believe this is anything relevant or even important coming from you ?

You can't even tell when you are chasing your tail from a tail of any another tail so ... meh

~

28 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

You just use meaningless words in meaningless sentences. It is often  not possible to decipher any meaning because there  is none.  You make up stuff Eg ive never claimed profundity. In general I write as a speak, simple clear, but at my level of education For example your second sentence here has no reference to any specific subject  it sounds  profound  and intelligent but has no meaning, as it is written  it also uses mixed metaphors whic make it unintelligible  eg  you dont meander a clamber from  a rendering. 

Never ? Are you being pedantic again or are you being a liar in distress again ? Oh ... that's rhetorical by the way, just in case you go all puristic with your pedantry again. 

~

28 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

It is just physically impossible  You can not sieve foggy extractions from,  mists either  It simply does not hold water 

Habitat implies it was possible, I neither said not suggested it was, I clearly presented it as what you want us to believe from what you implied you are capable of doing.

Well ... you do hold a lot less than water and a whole lot more of a lot of other incredible as well as much that are indeterminable which you insists on everyone to believe as truths  

~

Just now, Habitat said:

I recall when the TV newsreader announced that some unfortunate had been bitten on the funnel by a finger-web spider, to great gales of laughter across the nation, but that is now lost in the mists of quirky broadcasting facts and incidents. ( Hint: there is a creature called a Funnel-Web Spider). I'm sure 3 eyes appreciates the humour.

That rather depends if the Newsreader did claim that the funnel spider was a friend or that his dear departed someone will protect him / her or suggestions arising from some divine presence as protection before the bite. If this is the extent of what humor means to you then I can begin to understand why you chase your own tail for so much fun, I apologize for tickling your tummy, what you need is some tummy churning

~ 

 

[eight bits]

1 hour ago, danydandan said:

Jesus guy's! Any chance you'd like to stop the p***ing contest and swing back on topic?

Well yes, a certain amount of woo has emerged on the topic of lobsters. It may be a Jordan Peterson thing.

Putting aside that lobster refers to different species in different places where English is spoken, the real thing, the New England variety, is prepared by boiling the victim alive (a rather gruesome-sounding death, but hey, no brain, no pain, right?). What you do next is up to you. The usual thing here in New England is just to break the shell (we have a tool for cracking the thicker shells, also useful for questioning terrorists) and pull the thing apart. Dipping the meat piece by piece in melted butter is especially popular.

But creativity abounds. Lobster makes a great chowder, bisque and "salad." Last summer, on a field trip to Maine (where the lobster is some kind of totem animal), I learned that a lobster salad where the meat is dipped in mayonnaise (speaking of things which differ depending on where you are) was called Connecticut style. Woo is clearly at work here, since anything involving mayonnaise is in reality Canadian style, and the closest Connecticut ever comes to culinary distinction is to call itself the "nutmeg state." (Unfortunately, the nickname refers to early Connecticut traders' reputation for selling fake wooden nutmegs).

So, take your pick woo fans:

- "Lobsters" are caught anywhere except in the frigid waters off the coasts of New England

- Lobsters boiled alive feel no pain (they just try to escape the pot because of ganglia and reflexes), incidentally proving that consciousness ends at death

- To saute lobster is a legitimate culinary maneuver (hell's bells, the texture of the meat is critical; you saute it?)

- To make an English verb out of a French participle is a legitimate linguistic maneuver (Google parses that correctly)

- Connecticutian nutmeg is not to be trusted (Google even parses connecticutian correctly, along with connecticutter - somebody at Google hates 3ye, there is no other explanation)

- Somebody at Google hates 3ye

- There is no other explanation

Voila: back on topic.

 

Edited March 11, 2019 by eight bits

[Habitat]

2 minutes ago, third_eye said:

That rather depends if the Newsreader did claim that the funnel spider was a friend or that his dear departed someone will protect him / her or suggestions arising from some divine presence as protection before the bite. If this is the extent of what humor means to you then I can begin to understand why you chase your own tail for so much fun, I apologize for tickling your tummy, what you need is some tummy churning

~ 

Wow ! And the great man joc insists he understands all that you say. 

[Habitat]

7 minutes ago, eight bits said:

Well yes, a certain amount of woo has emerged on the topic of lobsters.

Probably arising from there being a thing called a "Marron", though not connected at all with the mystery of marronosticism

[SHaYap]

47 minutes ago, Habitat said:

Wow ! And the great man joc insists he understands all that you say. 

Nothing better than to be understood by greatness than to merely be resting at ease based upon nothing than the absence of insolvent apparitions 

~

[Habitat]

25 minutes ago, third_eye said:

resting at ease based upon nothing than the absence of insolvent apparitions 

I'll need to get joc to nut this out ! He's the one !

Edited March 11, 2019 by Habitat