Subject: cooking a potatoe
Newsgroups: rec.food.cooking
From: larry (larya at rogers.com)
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 13:02:04 GMT
--------
Greetings and Happy New Year.
I feel somewhat awkward with this question...
Me and the kitchen are not the best of friends...
I do know how to boil water but...
Can you cook a potatoe in a microwave.
I just learned how to make mashed potatoes however can you cook a potatoe in a microwave.
From: Sidney (sid_post_NO_SPAM_please at hotmail.com)
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 06:28:48 -0700
--------
Larry,
Yes, you can bake a potatoe in the microwave. It is actually very easy. Wash your potatoe to get rid of any dirt, take a fork or knife and pierce the skin in two or three place to let out steam so it doesn't "explode" and make a mess, then cover it with a clean kitchen towel and "nuke" it.
Use a good plate (no paper or plastic disposable plates) because it will get hot. I typically use a cloth kitchen towel but, paper towels work too. If it is not "clean", you will cook what ever is on the towel itself. I once set a cloth towel on fire that had a bit of grease or cheese on it from prior use that caused a little excitement but, it smoked so much that I caught it early and no damage was done other then scorching the towel itself.
Depending on your microwave and the size of your potatoe, you may have to experiment a little to get the cooking just right. Small potatoes cook faster then large ones. You can take a large potatoe and cut in half to for faster cooking. If you cook multiple potatoes (or pieces), place them in a "ring" with nothing in the center so that they will all cook evenly. If your microwave doesn't have a turntable, turn you plate halfway through the cooking process. In my microwave (1300Watts), a large potatoe cooks in about 11 minutes. Small potatoes cooking in about 8 minutes. With multiple small potatoes (or slices) placed in a ring formation, try 8 minutes plus 1 minute for each additional potatoe.
I never really learned how to cook at home because my Mom felt the only reason I would leave home is to get married and my wife would cook for me. Needless to say, I am not married and living on my own. I was fortunate enough to have some older ladies at work who I became friends with. They "mothered" me a little and helped me learn how to cook during our "water cooler" conversations. The other thing that helped, getting rid of the cheap pans I had to cook with. I got a couple of really good Calphalon "try me" pans that were thick heavy anodized aluminum and I quit offering burnt sacrifices to the "garbage can gods" thanks to the great heat distribution on those pans. Good pans also helped overcome the poor quality stoves in the apartments I lived in. I also learned that properly seasoned Lodge cast iron (like you find at Wal-mart) worked really great on those bad stoves - it took a while to get them hot but, they heated evenly and cooked like a dream after those old age "geezer" stoves finally coughed and sputtered out enough BTU's to warm the pan up.
I hope this helps ;-)
Sid
From: Dan Goodman (dsgood at visi.com)
Date: 30 Dec 2003 14:50:26 GMT
--------
larry wrote:
> Can you cook a potatoe in a microwave.
> I just learned how to make mashed potatoes however can you cook a
> potatoe in a microwave.
General cooking suggestion: In the cooking section of any large general bookstore, there will be cookbooks intended for college students who have never before done their own cooking. -"This is a stove. This is a frying pan. This is an egg."-
Most of these are at a more elementary level than cookbooks for children. (The previous sentence is not a joke.)
From: Dimitri (Dimitri_C at prodigy.net)
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 14:59:36 GMT
--------
larry wrote:
> Can you cook a potatoe in a microwave.
> I just learned how to make mashed potatoes however can you cook a
> potatoe in a microwave.
Yes. Microwaves cook food by exciting the water molecules within the food. This creates the heat that cooks the food.
Generally the larger the potato the more steam or vent holes are necessary to create an "even cook". I like to use a 2 tine corn holder and pierce the potato on each end and around the circumference as well.
From: Katra (Katra at centurytel.net)
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 11:18:47 -0600
--------
larry wrote:
> Can you cook a potatoe in a microwave.
> I just learned how to make mashed potatoes however can you cook a
> potatoe in a microwave.
Nuking spuds works well, if you do it right. :-)
It works if you seal the potatoe in something. I prefer a covered corningware with a little added water, but wrapping the spud in waxed paper works pretty well also.
Cooking time will depend on the size of the tuber. You will have to experiment.
From: stan at temple.edu
Date: 30 Dec 2003 19:20:43 GMT
--------
larry wrote:
> Can you cook a potatoe in a microwave.
> I just learned how to make mashed potatoes however can you cook a
> potatoe in a microwave.
You can certainly cook a potato in a microwave oven. There are many ways to cook potatoes in a microwave oven, just as their are many ways to cook a potato in a regular oven. Could you be more specific about how you prefer to cook your potatoes (.e.g.,
scalopped, whole, french fried, etc.)?
From: jm_1951 at yahoo.com (Jonathan Mason)
Date: 31 Dec 2003 08:21:28 -0800
--------
stan at temple wrote:
> You can certainly cook a potato in a microwave oven. There are
> many ways to cook potatoes in a microwave oven, just as their are
> many ways to cook a potato in a regular oven. Could you be more
> specific about how you prefer to cook your potatoes (.e.g.,
> scalopped, whole, french fried, etc.)?
I don't really see how you can cook scalloped or French fried potatoes in a microwave oven. Please explain.
From: bistoury at earthlink.net (Matt)
Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2003 22:56:19 GMT
--------
larry wrote:
> Can you cook a potatoe in a microwave.
> I just learned how to make mashed potatoes however can you cook a
> potatoe in a microwave.
We do it all the time and it works real well. You can boil them, bake them and do just about anything you can anyother way in just a few minutes.
From: peecee (peecee at pcpostal.com )
Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2004 15:30:26 +1000
--------
bistoury at earthlink wrote:
> We do it all the time and it works real well. You can boil them, bake
> them and do just about anything you can anyother way in just a few minutes.
Why would you eat something that is directly related to Microwaves and radiation.
Wouldn't you rather just use a gun it would be much faster.
;)
From: Sidney (sid_post_NO_SPAM_please at hotmail.com)
Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2004 09:45:19 -0700
--------
peecee wrote:
> Why would you eat something that is directly related to Microwaves and
> radiation.
> Wouldn't you rather just use a gun it would be much faster.
> ;)
You have a strange sense of humor.
If you are serious, you need some more education from a reputable school.
From: augie (augie at partlycloudy.com)
Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2004 10:07:03 +1000
--------
Sydney posted:
> You have a strange sense of humor.
>
> If you are serious, you need some more education from a reputable school.
It was a parodied quote from bistoury at earthlink, who actually asked the question.
Do keep up.
From: bistoury at earthlink.net (Matt)
Date: Fri, 02 Jan 2004 01:12:40 GMT
--------
peecee wrote:
> Why would you eat something that is directly related to Microwaves and
> radiation.
It is my understanding that there is NO radiation evidenced in the end product. We did contact a scientist at the Livermore Lab in regarding this problem. He wrote back that there would be less radiation that ones is exposed to daily in background radiation. I hope this helps you understand microwaving processes better.
From: Richard Periut (rperiut at njDOTrr.com)
Date: Fri, 02 Jan 2004 01:16:41 GMT
--------
bistoury at earthlink wrote:
> It is my understanding that there is NO radiation evidenced in the end
> product. We did contact a scientist at the Livermore Lab in regarding
> this problem. He wrote back that there would be less radiation that
> ones is exposed to daily in background radiation.
Microwaves are part of the energy spectrum that has nothing to do with gamma rays and radioactive materials. They simply cause the molecules in a product (liquid form or containing liquid,) to increase their motion (heat.) It has nothing to do with nuclear radiation.
A properly sealed MW is perfectly safe.
From: augie (augie at partlycloudy.com)
Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2004 12:09:53 +1000
--------
bistoury at earthlink wrote:
> It is my understanding that there is NO radiation evidenced in the end
> product. We did contact a scientist at the Livermore Lab in regarding
> this problem. He wrote back that there would be less radiation that
> ones is exposed to daily in background radiation.
No better than you understand contaminated meat issues.
From: bistoury at earthlink.net
Date: Fri, 02 Jan 2004 18:57:22 GMT
--------
augie wrote:
> No better than you understand contaminated meat issues.
I thoroughly understand contaminated meat and all meat products in this u.s. are contaminated and unfit for human consumption.
From: Sheryl Rosen (catmandy at optonline.net)
Date: Sat, 03 Jan 2004 04:45:49 GMT
--------
bistoury at earthlink wrote:
> I thoroughly understand contaminated meat and all meat products in this
> u.s. are contaminated and unfit for human consumption.
All meat is contaminated and everything causes Alzheimers. Oh, and achiote seeds can be bought at a farmers market, then get their bottoms whacked off and steamed and dipped in tofu. (Those are artichokes, but whatever.)
We get it. You've convinced everyone!
Now will you go away?
From: Steve Calvin (calvins at optonline.net)
Date: Sat, 03 Jan 2004 14:30:53 GMT
--------
Sheryl Rosen wrote:
> All meat is contaminated and everything causes Alzheimers.
Yeah, and *never* eat bacon and drink coffee at the same sitting. It can cause cancer. ( I actually read that once, sheesh)
From: Brian Macke (macke at strangelove.net)
Date: Sat, 03 Jan 2004 15:46:49 -0600
--------
Steve Calvin wrote:
> Yeah, and *never* eat bacon and drink coffee at the same sitting. It can
> cause cancer. ( I actually read that once, sheesh)
If you must have bacon with your coffee, use Bacos. Or you could sprinkle your bacon with Foldger's Crystals for about the same effect.
(That effect is churning your stomach, in case you were curious.)
From: bistoury at earthlink.net (Matt)
Date: Sun, 04 Jan 2004 02:22:32 GMT
--------
Steve Calvin wrote:
> Yeah, and *never* eat bacon and drink coffee at the same sitting. It can
> cause cancer. ( I actually read that once, sheesh)
Preserved bacon with Nitrates is the worst of all things to eat. Coffee isn't far behind.
Use a substitute for coffee if you must drink that sort of thing.
From: bistoury at earthlink.net (Matt)
Date: Sun, 04 Jan 2004 02:21:04 GMT
--------
Sheryl Rosen wrote:
> Now will you go away?
Please read in the '03 March Journal of Chiropractic for an unbiased opinion on the use of the microwave. It is peer reviewed and not biased by allopathic thoughts.
From: Katra (Katra at centurytel.net)
Date: Sat, 03 Jan 2004 20:34:06 -0600
--------
bistoury at earthlink.net wrote:
> Please read in the '03 March Journal of Chiropractic for an unbiased
> opinion on the use of the microwave. It is peer reviewed and not biased
> by allopathic thoughts.
Link please?
And please quit top posting.
It's very annoying......
Thank you.
From: baldguy96 at aol.comnoads (BillKirch)
Date: 01 Jan 2004 07:20:59 GMT
--------
>Can you cook a potatoe
Who are you Dan Quayle? BG
Subject: Re: cooking a potato
Newsgroups: rec.food.cooking
From: Julia Altshuler (jaltshuler at comcast.net)
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 15:21:14 GMT
--------
Dan Goodman wrote:
> General cooking suggestion: In the cooking section of any large general
> bookstore, there will be cookbooks intended for college students who have
> never before done their own cooking. -"This is a stove. This is a frying
> pan. This is an egg."-
> Most of these are at a more elementary level than cookbooks for children.
> (The previous sentence is not a joke.)
Let me add to this excellent advice.
First, don't be put off by getting a basic cookbook. Everyone has to start somewhere, and you'll be a happier cook in the long run if you learn the basics well and build from there.
Second, you'll find more potato recipes on the web if you spell it P-O-T-A-T-O. (I'm not normally one to go around correcting spelling, but in this case, it makes a difference in achieving your goal.)
--Lia
From: Sam D. (blueewater at greenheart.com)
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 09:07:14 -0800
--------
Julia Altshuler wrote:
> Second, you'll find more potato recipes on the web if you spell it
> P-O-T-A-T-O. (I'm not normally one to go around correcting spelling,
> but in this case, it makes a difference in achieving your goal.)
He must have been referring to a Dan Quayle type of potato.
From: penmart01 at aol.como (Sheldon)
Date: 30 Dec 2003 17:23:22 GMT
--------
Julia Altshuler wrote:
>First, don't be put off by getting a basic cookbook. Everyone has to
>start somewhere,* and you'll be a happier cook in the long run if you
>learn the basics well and build from there.
>
>Second, you'll find more potato recipes on the web if you spell it
>P-O-T-A-T-O. (I'm not normally one to go around correcting spelling,*
>but in this case,* it makes a difference in achieving your goal.)
Commas are not decorations, nor are parentheses.
I know, you're an obsessive-compulsive punctuator and/or a hesitant speaker.
From: pattee at spot.colorado.edu (Donna Pattee)
Date: 30 Dec 2003 21:55:54 GMT
--------
Sheldon wrote:
>Commas are not decorations, nor are parentheses.
>I know, you're an obsessive-compulsive punctuator and/or a hesitant speaker.
The first of the two commas you flagged were used correctly. The third comma was not necessary. One way to tell if a comma is needed is to try the parts of the sentence as separate sentences. Doing this you will see that both "Everyone has to start somewhere." and "You'll be a happier cook in the long run if you learn the basics well and build from there." stand alone as proper sentences. Thus, putting them together with "and" means that a comma is required.
From: penmart01 at aol.como (Sheldon)
Date: 30 Dec 2003 23:33:38 GMT
--------
Donna Pattee writes:
>The first of the two commas you flagged
were *was* used correctly.
You're absolutely wrong.
I flagged three (3) commas.
And it's *was* used.
Another EDU poster bites the dust. I truly hope you're an institutional lavatory monitor and not an educator.
Methinks you'd best cut your losses and quit now.
From: pattee at spot.colorado.edu (Donna Pattee)
Date: 31 Dec 2003 16:44:50 GMT
--------
Sheldon wrote:
>You're absolutely wrong.
>I flagged three (3) commas.
>And it's *was* used.
Absolutely correct. The sentence should have read:
The first two of the commas you flagged were used correctly.
The rest of my explanation is correct as written.
>Another EDU poster bites the dust. I truly hope you're an institutional
>lavatory monitor and not an educator.
Actually neither, thanks.
>Methinks you'd best cut your losses and quit now.
It isn't worth discussing further, so I will quit with this post.
From: Bob Pastorio (pastorio at rica.net)
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 23:20:36 -0500
--------
Donna Pattee wrote:
> The first of the two commas you flagged were used correctly.
The first of the two commas you flagged *was* used correctly.
> The third
> comma was not necessary.
If the rule being applied is "when a conjunction connects two clauses that could stand alone as separate sentences, then a comma precedes it," the sentence doesn't need the second comma.
But it may also be correctly punctuated, "I'm not normally one to go around correcting spelling but, in this case, it makes a difference in achieving your goal." A non-essential phrase should be set off by commas. And a serious pedant would even put another comma in front of the "but" so it reads "...spelling, but, in this case, it makes..."
Dueling rules...
> One way to tell if a comma is needed is to try
> the parts of the sentence as separate sentences. Doing this you will see
> that both "Everyone has to start somewhere." and "You'll be a happier cook
> in the long run if you learn the basics well and build from there." stand
> alone as proper sentences. Thus, putting them together with "and" means
> that a comma is required.
The rule is that the comma is to be used with a conjunction in a compound sentence when punctuation is necessary for clarity.
Otherwise, it may be omitted and generally should be. The sentence quoted here doesn't need it to be properly understood.
From: Brian Macke (macke at strangelove.net)
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 16:43:42 -0600
--------
Julia Altshuler wrote:
> Second, you'll find more potato recipes on the web if you spell it
> P-O-T-A-T-O. (I'm not normally one to go around correcting spelling,
> but in this case, it makes a difference in achieving your goal.)
"Potatoe" isn't technically a misspelling. It's an antiquated spelling (according to the Oxford English Dictionary). It would be like saying "ye" is a misspelling of "the".
From: jm_1951 at yahoo.com (Jonathan Mason)
Date: 31 Dec 2003 08:13:10 -0800
--------
Brian Macke wrote:
> "Potatoe" isn't technically a misspelling. It's an antiquated spelling
> (according to the Oxford English Dictionary). It would be like saying "ye"
> is a misspelling of "the".
Actually "ye" IS a mispelling, because the revival of "ye" as in "ye olde coffee shoppe" is based on a misreading of the anglo saxon letter 'thorn' which was pronounced as 'th' but written something like a 'y' in manuscripts, which the revivers obviously did not know.
"Potatoe" is not a mispelling if it is placed in quotes and given as an example of an antiquated spelling, as you have done, but any proofreader in commercial publication would correct it without hesitation.
From: sandynne at aol.com (Sandy n ne)
Date: 31 Dec 2003 22:30:17 GMT
--------
You can cook a potato in the microwave. Just be sure to poke it a few times with a fork first to let out steam (you definately don't want it blowing up on you!)
From: Richard Periut (rperiut at njDOTrr.com)
Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2003 22:34:44 GMT
--------
Sandy n ne wrote:
> You can cook a potato in the microwave. Just be sure to poke it a few times
> with a fork first to let out steam (you definately don't want it blowing up on
> you!)
I like to butter the skin, poke holes with a fork, and give it 6 minutes, turn, then another 6.
Love the hard crunchy crust that forms.
From: The Wolf (elvispmpsd at compuserve.net)
Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2003 23:02:03 GMT
--------
Richard Periut opined:
> I like to butter the skin, poke holes with a fork, and give it 6
> minutes, turn, then another 6.
I have always been disappointed with nuked potatoes.
I still do it the old fashioned way, 1:00 at 425°
From: k3_e81 at yahoo.com (-L.)
Date: 1 Jan 2004 01:08:30 -0800
--------
The Wolf wrote:
> I have always been disappointed with nuked potatoes.
If you wash a medium-sized potato, pierce 3-4 times and wrap in a paper towel (still damp), nuke about 3 minutes, turn it over and nuke about 2 additional minutes (not quite done), then WRAP IN ALUMINIUM FOIL and let it set on a counter top for about 5 minutes to internalize the heat, the potato will taste like a regular baked-in-foil (steamed) potato.
I often do this, then pop them into the oven for the last 5-10 miuntes while the main course finishes.
From: penmart01 at aol.como (Sheldon)
Date: 01 Jan 2004 15:52:05 GMT
--------
k3_e81 at yahoo (-LIAR.) writes:
>If you wash a medium-sized potato, pierce 3-4 times and wrap in a
>paper towel (still damp), nuke about 3 minutes, turn it over and nuke
>about 2 additional minutes (not quite done), then WRAP IN ALUMINIUM
>FOIL and let it set on a counter top for about 5 minutes to
>internalize the heat, the potato will taste like a regular
>baked-in-foil (steamed) potato.
>
>I often do this, then pop "them" into the oven for the last 5-10 miuntes
>while the main course finishes.
So how many is "them"? I can see perhaps doing as you say for one or two but it seems to me for spuds enough for a dinner, baking in the oven to begin with would require less time and far less effort. Somehow I find you're being less than truthful... in as you've never done exactly as you claim, you just made up that fercocktah story so you'd have something to post.
From: stan at temple.edu
Date: 6 Jan 2004 21:07:25 GMT
--------
-L. wrote:
> If you wash a medium-sized potato, pierce 3-4 times and wrap in a
> paper towel (still damp), nuke about 3 minutes, turn it over and nuke
> about 2 additional minutes (not quite done), then WRAP IN ALUMINIUM
> FOIL and let it set on a counter top for about 5 minutes to
> internalize the heat, the potato will taste like a regular
> baked-in-foil (steamed) potato.
I don't doubt this, but there is no way the texture of a nuked potato with your method is the same as a potato that's baked the traditional way. The only way to get that hot grainy interior with the dry crispy skin is to bake the potato in an oven.
From: k3_e81 at yahoo.com (-L.)
Date: 6 Jan 2004 22:51:23 -0800
--------
stan at temple wrote:
> I don't doubt this, but there is no way the texture of a nuked potato
> with your method is the same as a potato that's baked the traditional
> way. The only way to get that hot grainy interior with the dry crispy
> skin is to bake the potato in an oven.
Well, the skin part, I agree with, but the interior is pretty much the same as a real baker. I prefer the crispy skins as well, but these do in a pinch. :)
From: jm_1951 at yahoo.com (Jonathan Mason)
Date: 1 Jan 2004 06:59:21 -0800
--------
Sandy n ne wrote:
> You can cook a potato in the microwave. Just be sure to poke it a few times
> with a fork first to let out steam (you definately don't want it blowing up on
> you!)
It seems to me that this is a fallacy, because it supposes that the steam can pass through the flesh of the potato, but not through the skin, just like frying a sausage. However I don't think this is so. In Wal-Mart (I think) you can buy potatoes wrapped in film that you just pop in the microwave for 7 minutes and they come out really nice without holes. Also, I have often nuked potatoes without film or fork holes and they do just fine with no explosions.
From: kilikini (kilikini1 at NOSPAMhotmail.com)
Date: Thu, 01 Jan 2004 15:26:07 GMT
--------
Jonathan Mason wrote:
> It seems to me that this is a fallacy, because it supposes that the
> steam can pass through the flesh of the potato, but not through the
> skin, just like frying a sausage. However I don't think this is so. In
> Wal-Mart (I think) you can buy potatoes wrapped in film that you just
> pop in the microwave for 7 minutes and they come out really nice
> without holes. Also, I have often nuked potatoes without film or fork
> holes and they do just fine with no explosions.
Yes, it is a fallacy. I have been nuking my potatoes for years without poking holes in them. They've never blown up on me and I've nuked some large taters.
From: Sidney (sid_post_NO_SPAM_please at hotmail.com)
Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2004 09:41:43 -0700
--------
If your potato has a ruffed up skin, then no problem. An uncovered potato with an unscuffed skin can "pop" and make a mess. Just because it hasn't happened to you, doesn't mean it hasn't happened to others.
The ones I had explode were smaller potatoes. I heard the "pop" and then proceeded to clean hot potato off the microwave. YMMV
From: pattee at spot.colorado.edu (Donna Pattee)
Date: 2 Jan 2004 16:26:52 GMT
--------
kilikini wrote:
>Yes, it is a fallacy. I have been nuking my potatoes for years without
>poking holes in them. They've never blown up on me and I've nuked some
>large taters.
Wow, I guess I just imagined that sweet potato that blew up in my microwave a couple of weeks ago, huh? Too bad - the resultant cleanup was VERY realistic.
From: hahabogus (not at valid.invalid)
Date: Fri, 02 Jan 2004 17:00:56 GMT
--------
Donna Pattee wrote:
> Wow, I guess I just imagined that sweet potato that blew up in my
> microwave a couple of weeks ago, huh? Too bad - the resultant cleanup
> was VERY realistic.
Same thing for me ...I imagined a regular potato just blew up causing lots of clean up. Funny thing the imagination.
From: Nancy Young (qwerty at mail.monmouth.com)
Date: Fri, 02 Jan 2004 12:04:56 -0500
--------
hahabogus wrote:
> Same thing for me ...I imagined a regular potato just blew up causing lots
> of clean up. Funny thing the imagination.
(laugh) That's what I was thinking, seems to me an awful lot of rfc pros with credibility have had potatoes blow up in the microwave. I don't microwave potatoes, but I would sure err on the side of your experience if I did.
From: Frogleg (frogleg at nowhere.com)
Date: Sun, 04 Jan 2004 18:51:21 GMT
--------
hahabogus wrote:
>Same thing for me ...I imagined a regular potato just blew up causing lots
>of clean up. Funny thing the imagination.
Try an eggplant. Then sell the oven.
BTW, I imagine the (relative) lack of consistent m'wave explosions is that they tend to be a dampish form of cooking. Potato skins in oven become hard and crispy, containing the steam 'till it blows the critter apart. M'wave is more like steaming, and the skin becomes soft and more easily permeable for interior steam to escape. YMMV, obviously. I'm a sissy. I poke holes in the skin.
From: BOB (LOL at belsouth.not)
Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2004 14:37:21 -0500
--------
Frogleg typed:
> Try an eggplant. Then sell the oven.
I have seen one...not a pretty sight (I didn't do it, but I heard the "pop" from the other room and saw the mess)
> BTW, I imagine the (relative) lack of consistent m'wave explosions is
> that they tend to be a dampish form of cooking. Potato skins in oven
> become hard and crispy, containing the steam 'till it blows the
> critter apart. M'wave is more like steaming, and the skin becomes soft
> and more easily permeable for interior steam to escape. YMMV,
> obviously. I'm a sissy. I poke holes in the skin.
LOL! Me too.
I have been microwaving potatos for years without poking the holes. Never had a problem, either. After I heard about the exploding potato experiences, I decided that I never wanted to see one first hand and have been poking holes in them ever since.
My Mom didn't believe an egg would explode in a microwave when she got her first mw oven. Decided to give it a try. 45 seconds (IIRC) and then 3 hours of cleaning the oven. She wouldn't let anyone cook eggs of any kind in the mw for a couple of months after that.
From: Frogleg (frogleg at nowhere.com)
Date: Sun, 04 Jan 2004 20:19:41 GMT
--------
BOB wrote:
>> Try an eggplant. Then sell the oven.
>
>I have seen one...not a pretty sight (I didn't do it, but I heard the "pop"
>from the other room and saw the mess)
I admit my own experience was in a conventional oven, and the explosion was indeed impressive and quite audible from a considerable distance. I didn't even jump. My mind immediately said "exploding eggplant." And I *did* sell the stove, 'as is' with appropriately apologetic explanations. Had a new stove on order anyhow.
>My Mom didn't believe an egg would explode in a microwave when she got her
>first mw oven. Decided to give it a try. 45 seconds (IIRC) and then 3 hours
>of cleaning the oven. She wouldn't let anyone cook eggs of any kind in the
>mw for a couple of months after that.
I thought about mentioning eggs. I believe even an intact yolk can make a right old mess. Although I believe thoroughly mixed eggs in an open container are kind of interesting to watch. You've tried grape-racing, of course. :-)
From: penmart01 at aol.como (Sheldon)
Date: 04 Jan 2004 20:47:56 GMT
--------
>Frogbag croaked
BOOB wrote:
>
>>Frogbag croaked:
>
>>> Try an eggplant. Then sell the oven.
>>
>>I have seen one...not a pretty sight.
>
>I admit my own experience was in a conventional oven, and the
>explosion was indeed impressive and quite audible from a considerable
>distance.
Taters and eggplants ain't shit compared with the contamination constantly spurting from your blowhole... who do you expect is going to clean up this newsgroup of all your pollution... RFC needs to be placed on the Super Frog Fund! Frogbag, you need to GET A POND!
From: Katra (Katra at centurytel.net)
Date: Sun, 04 Jan 2004 15:11:26 -0600
--------
Sheldon wrote:
> Taters and eggplants ain't shit compared with the contamination constantly
> spurting from your blowhole... who do you expect is going to clean up this
> newsgroup of all your pollution... RFC needs to be placed on the Super Frog
> Fund! Frogbag, you need to GET A POND!
I see Shel' is drunk again....... <sigh>
From: Katra (Katra at centurytel.net)
Date: Sun, 04 Jan 2004 15:08:37 -0600
--------
Frogleg wrote:
> I thought about mentioning eggs. I believe even an intact yolk can
> make a right old mess. Although I believe thoroughly mixed eggs in an
> open container are kind of interesting to watch. You've tried
> grape-racing, of course. :-)
<perks> Grape racing??? Do tell?
I'm into cheap entertainment, which is why I like to nuke peeps. <G>
From: Frogleg (frogleg at nowhere.com)
Date: Sun, 04 Jan 2004 22:03:33 GMT
--------
Katra wrote:
><perks> Grape racing??? Do tell?
>I'm into cheap entertainment, which is why I like to nuke peeps. <G>
Well, the grape skin encloses a lot of moisture, and the hole at the stem end is like the exhaust of a rocket ship. Just put 2 or 3 in the m'wave and watch them move. This entertainment was suggested by an earlier rfc poster, and lived up to expectations. I chickened out and opened the door before they exploded. If indeed, they do.
Easier to clean up than nuked Peeps, I think. Although of little culinary use. I wonder abourt rasins...
From: Katra (Katra at centurytel.net)
Date: Sun, 04 Jan 2004 16:28:53 -0600
--------
Frogleg wrote:
> Well, the grape skin encloses a lot of moisture, and the hole at the
> stem end is like the exhaust of a rocket ship. Just put 2 or 3 in the
> m'wave and watch them move.
Awesome! ;-D You just know I'm going to try this...
Green or red grapes work better? I'd think green since they are more torpedo shaped. <G>
> Easier to clean up than nuked Peeps, I think. Although of little
> culinary use.
Nuked peeps are not that hard to clean up after if done on a corningware plate. :-) And they do have a culinary use. Squashed between two grahm crackers with a little bit of Nutella. <eg> The sugar left on the plate melts ok in the dishpan.
A use for hot grapes? I'd have to think on that.
> I wonder about rasins...
Hmmmmm.... added to cream of wheat, after the fact?
Just a thought. :-)
From: B-0b1 (SOS at grandecom.net)
Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2004 05:33:47 -0600
--------
Frogleg wrote:
> BTW, I imagine the (relative) lack of consistent m'wave explosions is
> that they tend to be a dampish form of cooking. Potato skins in oven
> become hard and crispy, containing the steam 'till it blows the
> critter apart. M'wave is more like steaming, and the skin becomes soft
> and more easily permeable for interior steam to escape. YMMV,
> obviously. I'm a sissy. I poke holes in the skin.
Yes, "venting" the potato's works well, but a mess can still ensue. Why bother with a mess when Gourmet cooking can be accomplished with an old fashioned LIDDED Iron pot. The Juices are kept in and dirty ovens become a thing of the past??
Yummy!! B-0b1