T1B

Arch Angel wrote:1. Preheat oven to 400 degrees and set tray to highest level closest to heating element

Goober McTuber wrote:

Arch Angel wrote:1. Preheat oven to 400 degrees and set tray to highest level closest to heating element

So are you broiling this? Because in most gas ovens the heat comes from the bottom, the top element kicks in only for broiling.

trev wrote:Lite olive oil?

Dinsdale wrote:

trev wrote:Lite olive oil?

"Fat free butter"?

PSSSST! "Fluff" ain't good for cooking.

Arch Angel wrote:I want to keep the calories and fat content down. My diet is 1400 calories and 30 grams of fat.

"Lite olive oil" is also called "light" or "mild" oil. These oils have undergone an extremely fine filtration process (without the use of heat or chemicals) to remove most of the natural color, aroma, and flavor. This makes them suitable for cooking or baking in recipes in which a fruity olive flavor isn't needed. The terms "lite," "light," and "mild" can be used along with "extra virgin olive oil," "virgin olive oil," and "olive oil."

In this case, "lite" or "light" do not refer to fat content. These oils contain the same amount of fat and calories as any other olive oil (about 13 grams of fat and 120 calories per tablespoon). The classifications instead refer to the oil's lighter color and flavor

Mikey wrote:Fat free butter ain't butter.

trev wrote:I've never seen lite olive oil. Unless you mean lighter in color. But I've never really looked for it either. I'm heading to Trader Joe's in a few and I'll get back to you.

smackaholic wrote:sounds more like an italian american recipe than an african american recipe.

lose all that fancy seasoning stuff cpt for some salt and pepper, dip it in egg, roll it in flour and into the deepfryer!! now that would be what i call AA style.

PSUFAN wrote:

trev wrote:I've never seen lite olive oil. Unless you mean lighter in color. But I've never really looked for it either. I'm heading to Trader Joe's in a few and I'll get back to you.

As I understand it, "lite" OO is marketed for those who find the taste of EVOO to be too strong - i.e. velveeta, wonder-bread eating Americans who are adverse to flavor in their food.

I had some Atlantic Cod this weekend that was simply delicious. It was news to me - but apparently Cod has seen a real resurgence in New England waters...and wild, line-caught Cod from the northern Atlantic is going to be a lot more commonplace. Yeehaw!

smackaholic wrote:

PSUFAN wrote:

trev wrote:I've never seen lite olive oil. Unless you mean lighter in color. But I've never really looked for it either. I'm heading to Trader Joe's in a few and I'll get back to you.

As I understand it, "lite" OO is marketed for those who find the taste of EVOO to be too strong - i.e. velveeta, wonder-bread eating Americans who are adverse to flavor in their food.

I had some Atlantic Cod this weekend that was simply delicious. It was news to me - but apparently Cod has seen a real resurgence in New England waters...and wild, line-caught Cod from the northern Atlantic is going to be a lot more commonplace. Yeehaw!

about 19 years or so ago the enviro weenies were crying that the atlantic cod was on the verge of extinction from over fishing and very strict limits were put on it.

my guess is they exaggerated it a bit.

smackaholic wrote:about 19 years or so ago the enviro weenies were crying that the atlantic cod was on the verge of extinction from over fishing and very strict limits were put on it.

my guess is they exaggerated it a bit.

With the increased effort by distant-water fleets, catches of northern cod increased in the late 1950s and early 1960s and peaked at just over 800,000 tons by 1968.3 The distant-water fleet were subjecting the northern cod to intense, unprecedented fishing pressure, and by 1975 the declining northern cod population was insufficient to yield even 300,000 tonnes, while various species of hake, and other groundfish populations showed dramatic drops too. Canada (and the U.S.), concerned that stocks were being reduced to almost nothing, passed legislation in 1976 to extend their national jurisdictions over marine living resources out to 200 nautical miles. The "foreign" fishing fleets were banished to the "high seas".

Catches naturally declined after the departure of the foreigners to just 139,000 tonnes in 1978, which is probably the level where the federal government should have capped it then, and left it for many years, to give the stock the chance to recover. Instead, government and investors in fishing were, like the foreigners, thinking big. Soon, the stern factory-trawlers, or draggers as they became known, became the mainstay of Canada's Atlantic offshore fishing fleet, and the northern cod catch began a steady rise again as a result. By the mid-1980s, it was the Canadians who were landing more than 250,000 tonnes of northern cod annually.4

Massive investments poured into constructing these huge "draggers". Draggers haul enormous, baglike nets, as long as a football field, held open by a combination of huge steel plates or "doors" and heavy chains and rollers that plow and scrape the ocean bottom. They drag up whole schools of fish and anything else in the way, inflicting immense damage to immature target and non-target fish and the benthic (bottom-dwelling) community. They were not only destroying critical habitiat, but they also contributed to destabilizing the ecosystem of the northern cod.

The draggers targetted huge aggregations of cod while they were spawning, a time when the fish population is highly vulnerable to capture and to the physical impacts of the bottom-trawling gear on the environment. Detractors of the technology claim that the excessive trawling on spawning stocks became highly disruptive to the spawning process, negatively impacting the reproductive behaviour of the fish.5 In addition, the trawling activity is thought to result in a physical dispersion of eggs and milt leading to a higher fertilzation failure. Physical and chemical damage to larvae caused by the trawling action may also reduce their chances of survival.

The effect of selective fishing on spawning grounds - that is, selectively over-exploiting one species in an ecosystem -- can have disastrous effect on the feeding relationships in that ecosystem. This contributes to the overall reduction of spawning stock biomass of the targeted species, but also an increase in the number of invertebrate and vertebrate predators such as crustacean and fish which will prey on cod eggs, larvae, and younger fish.6 It is little wonder that a species, like cod, would eventually run into difficulties struggling to survive when its habitat is being continuously destroyed and the balance of their food chain has been disrupted.

By 1992, the biomass estimate for northern cod was the lowest ever measured. The Canadian Minister of Fisheries and Oceans had no choice but to declare a ban on fishing northern cod. For the first time in 400 years the fishing of northern cod ceased in Newfoundland. The fisheries department issued a warning in 1995 that the entire northern cod population had declined to just 1,700 tonnes by the end of 1994, down from a 1990 biomass survey showing 400,000 tonnes, and showed no sign of recovery - just 1700 tonnes remained in a fishery that had for over a century yielded a quarter-million ton catches, year after year. The fisheries department also predicted that, even in the unlikely event that the fish stock started an immediate recovery, it would take at least 15 years before it would be healthy enough to withstand significant fishing.

Today [2007], it's estimated that offshore cod stocks are at one per cent of what they were in 1977.

PSUFAN wrote:Velveeta doesn't hurt people...PEOPLE hurt people.

Dr_Phibes wrote:

People don't hurt people... Seal hurts people.

Don't forget that once a decade, the hippies of the world unite and organise a Seal product boycott that's backed by their governments and it's a disaster.

Mikey wrote:

Dr_Phibes wrote:

People don't hurt people... Seal hurts people.

Don't forget that once a decade, the hippies of the world unite and organise a Seal product boycott that's backed by their governments and it's a disaster.

I'd feel a lot better about it if he'd get his face taken care of.

smackaholic wrote:so what is it? are they at 1% of '77 levels or has there been a real resurgence as PSU says?

not saying they were not over fished or that a moratorium on fishing wasn't a really good idea. just saying that it might be possible that the cod counting dudes were a bit off. maybe the cod census dudes should have done more advertising like the people census fukkers are.