Food & Cooking

[HM-2]

1 minute ago, whm1974 said:

And I stand by what I said....

Your standing by it doesn't make it right.

 

2 minutes ago, whm1974 said:

And BTW California also used to be Mexican Territory as well... 

As with the earlier comment about Texas being part of Mexico, this is completely irrelevant to the point I've made.

You might want to go read up on the actual history of Mexico before and during the Spanish conquest to get an understanding of the timelines involved here.

[whm1974]

4 minutes ago, HM-2 said:

Your standing by it doesn't make it right.

 

As with the earlier comment about Texas being part of Mexico, this is completely irrelevant to the point I've made.

You might want to go read up on the actual history of Mexico before and during the Spanish conquest to get an understanding of the timelines involved here.

I've read the History of both California and Texas. Did you know that both States used to be their own Republics?

[whm1974]

From Wikipedia(Of course it is...)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Republic

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_of_Texas

Yep I am right both States used to be owned by Mexico...

 

Note: I had real Texas Chili Con Carne and what is considered to be Chili Con Carne by Real Mexicans...  Both of which taste very different from each other. The Mexican version is way spicier.  

[HM-2]

1 hour ago, whm1974 said:

Did you know that both States used to be their own Republics?

Yes, I did. But I don't see how it's relevant to my point...

[whm1974]

38 minutes ago, HM-2 said:

Yes, I did. But I don't see how it's relevant to my point...

Let's see... Chili Con Carne is from TEXAS!!!

[HM-2]

1 minute ago, whm1974 said:

Let's see... Chili Con Carne is from TEXAS!!!

Highly debatable. 

[whm1974]

4 minutes ago, HM-2 said:

Highly debatable. 

Well I'm the US so...

[HM-2]

20 minutes ago, whm1974 said:

Well I'm the US so...

So...what exactly? Is your location supposed to be relevant? 

[Praesi]

 

 

 

[kpluck]

21 hours ago, whm1974 said:

Well in the USA there is a very huge debate about if the stew known as Chili Con Carne, if it proper to have beans included or not... I have of course since it is actually a Native American dish that just happens to have a Spanish name...

Native American dish? News to me. You should probably go edit the wikipedia page with your sources because it says nothing about Native Americans.

Quote

 

In writings from 1529, the Franciscan friar, Bernardino de Sahagún described chili pepper-seasoned stews being consumed in the Aztec capital, Tenochtitlan, now the location of Mexico City. The use of beef as the primary meat originated with Spanish colonizers. In Spanish, the term "chile con carne", consisting of the word chile (from the Nahuatl chīlli) and carne, Spanish for 'meat', is first recorded in a book from 1857 about the Mexican-American War. A recipe dating back to the 1850s describes dried beef, suet, dried chili peppers and salt, which were pounded together, formed into bricks and left to dry, which could then be boiled in pots in an army encampment in Monterrey, of what is now Nuevo León, Mexico.

Chili became commonly prepared in northern Mexico and southern Texas. Unlike some other Texas foods, such as barbecued brisket, chili largely originated with working-class Tejana and Mexican women. The chili queens of San Antonio, Texas were particularly famous in previous decades for selling their inexpensive chili-flavored beef stew in their casual "chili joints".

 

 

Back to the question at hand, "traditionally" I don't think it includes beans but recipes get modified. So beans or no beans, eaters' choice.

 

-KeithP

[whm1974]

2 hours ago, kpluck said:

Native American dish? News to me. You should probably go edit the wikipedia page with your sources because it says nothing about Native Americans.

 

Back to the question at hand, "traditionally" I don't think it includes beans but recipes get modified. So beans or no beans, eaters' choice.

 

-KeithP

Beans of course. Since the Dish started out as Working Class Food. Even in Texas, beans are still way cheaper then beef.

[whm1974]

Reading Bread Articles to learning about baking my own real breads, I just found out there is trend to adding activated charcoal to foods. Now this is safe to do this, but it doesn't really do what it's promotes claims that it does. In addiction AC will render Medications almost useless.

https://www.sustainweb.org/realbread/articles/oct18_the_dark_side_charcoal_bread/

https://www.realsimple.com/food-recipes/cooking-tips-techniques/activated-charcoal-in-food

 

Personally I rather, at least as far as bread is concerned, prefer to use darker grains and/or longer cooking times. Or just simply use Cocoa Powder.

[mahyar]

well gordon ramsey's opinion about this is worth hearing iirc he said it at hot ones

[whm1974]

Just now, mahyar said:

well gordon ramsey's opinion about this is worth hearing iirc he said it at hot ones

The Chief?

[mahyar]

Just now, whm1974 said:

The Chief?

yes THE gordon ramsey

[whm1974]

14 minutes ago, mahyar said:

yes THE gordon ramsey

Well pardon me I usually don't watch cooking shows.

[mahyar]

2 minutes ago, whm1974 said:

Well pardon me I usually don't watch cooking shows.

hot ones is not a cooking show it is a interview show which im surprised linus wasnt there 

[whm1974]

3 minutes ago, mahyar said:

hot ones is not a cooking show it is a interview show which im surprised linus wasnt there 

Linus is into Cooking his own food?

[whm1974]

1 minute ago, Caroline said:

why would you eat coal? unless you're a steampunkish robot whose stomach is a furnace of course

It is Charcoal, not Coal...

[mahyar]

3 minutes ago, whm1974 said:

Linus is into Cooking his own food?

no it is a show that any celebrity can go they even interviewed mkbhd neil degrasse tyson shaq and scarlett johansson  

[mahyar]

their playlist:

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLAzrgbu8gEMIIK3r4Se1dOZWSZzUSadfZ

[mahyar]

Just now, Caroline said:

charcoal is fuel too

not normal charcoal its some kind of biscuit 

[mahyar]

1 minute ago, Benji said:

IIRC it isn't even used in the food industry for anything, but rather in medicine for orally taken toxins as it binds them and thus aren't being digested. That is what activated charcoal is used for, but for eating? The only "trend" concerning that in the food industry would be colouring food black without spoiling the taste, but other than that it probably has no taste and isn't meant to be used outside of the medical field or filter systems.

well my sister forced me to eat a charcoal ice cream they also taste like an abomination  

[SpaceGhostC2C]

20 minutes ago, whm1974 said:

It is Charcoal, not Coal...

A.k.a. "vegetal coal", as opposed to "mineral coal".

11 minutes ago, mahyar said:

not normal charcoal its some kind of biscuit 

No. It's just burnt wood. For example, if you have a fireplace, the wood you use turns to coal (or "charcoal"), then to ashes.

 

This is also what you burn to cook in a grill (unless you use dry wood, that then turns to coal, eventually being the same). You don't cook with mined coal.

[whm1974]

2 minutes ago, SpaceGhostC2C said:

A.k.a. "vegetal coal", as opposed to "mineral coal".

No. It's just burnt wood. For example, if you have a fireplace, the wood you use turns to coal (or "charcoal"), then to ashes.

 

This is also what you burn to cook in a grill (unless you use dry wood, that then turns to coal, eventually being the same). You don't cook with mined coal.

Activated Charcoal is heated in a certain way to increase it's porousness. Which is why it is so good at removing poison.