Author Topic: Pulled pork - traditionally flawed  (Read 6908 times)

Offline Jmolinari

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1717
    • Email
Re: Pulled pork - traditionally flawed
« Reply #15 on: August 15, 2010, 08:52:23 PM »
In reality Loundry's posts always do boil down to "my way rules, and the other way is inherently flawed and wrong, even if other enjoy it, because they can't possibly enjoy it in reality, it's a facade".

I think that's true for things like wine, which is impossible to view logically because of its use as a measurement of sophistication.  I despise wine culture and think it's full of shit.  And yes, I do think people invent flavors, especially with wine, since the appreciation of it is used as a measurement of sophistication.  Perhaps that's what you were referring to with the "always" brush of the hand?  If so, then I fully agree with you.  But you don't have to take my word for it.  Your argument is with Frederic Brochet, not with me.  What do you think of his experiment that showed that professional wine tasters can't tell the difference between red wine and white wine?  If professional wine tasters can't do it, then what hope do neophyte wine tasters have?  Perhaps they'll just say things like, "I'm getting some star fruit notes in this one!"  It's a facade.

Now the subject at hand is quite a different one, and it's one that doesn't merely apply to bar-be-cue or even cooking.  The best analogue I can think of is the use of the programming language INTERCAL, or even C++, which spawned the phrase, "Life is too long to know C++ well."  It's likely that might be outside of your realm of expertise and thus completely meaningless to you.  In short, it's not a facade.  It's something quite different, but altogether very human.

I don't like my pulled pork dripping juices.

For some reason, people have assumed that I like my pulled pork "dripping juices" or "almost like soup".  Where on earth did I write that, or imply that not throwing all of the juices of the pulled pork into the fire would result in such?  I'm disappointed that BBQ aficionados haven't been able to mount a serious defense of, "All the juices dripping from the meat are garbage and should be thrown into the fire!"

I like the bark to be a bit dry and the inside moist, and flavorful. To say that all BBQ cooked pork is dry and bland is an exaggeration to elicit a response.

Most pulled pork is dry.  Almost all of it is bland.  Compare it to thit nuong or dae ju bulgogi, both of which are also cooked from the pork shoulder, and pulled pork pales in comparison.  You know it's true.  Why deny it?  Have you ever heard someone say, "This pulled pork is so good, it doesn't even need sauce!"?  They say that because pulled pork is usually so dry and bland that it needs sauce, and it comes out that way because of the traditionally flawed way that it's cooked.  (Throw all those worthless juices into the fire!)  A course in the study of surface area to volume ratio would be instructive.

The "response" I'm trying to "elicit" is a serious defense of throwing all the juices into the fire, given how bland and boring the meat turns out.

And i've never seen anyone on any BBQ boards comparing smoke rings as an indicator of what BBQ is better.

I wrote specifically that BBQ is about personal competition as well as professional and semi-professional.  It's coming from the belief that Cooking Should Be Hard.  It's a means of creating a feeling of superiority out of the mastery of methods that are unnecessary.  I think that's another reason why chefs and some supine home cooks hate the garlic press.  It makes mincing garlic easy.  They think mincing garlic should be hard, so they mock people who use garlic presses.

I'm not sure how to quote paragraphs separately, so i'll answer all of it down here/

1) I can't disagree with you on the wine stuff. I dont drink wine, but i do laugh at people describing it. Coffee is somewhat similar and some descriptions make me laugh as well. But what do i care? I mean, if people WANT to taste starfruit and hints of boysenberry and overripe mangosteen who am i to tell them not to? If they derive enjoyment from "finding" these flavors, and enjoy discussing them in a group, why would it bother me, even if i think they're making it up? If it bothers you, or people belittle you for NOT tasting them, find a different crowd that doesn't judge you on what you can and can't taste. If THEY like to do that, i don't think it's up to you to tell me otherwise, then aren't you becoming like them?

I'm not even sure what the whole reference to computer programming means.

2) When did i every say all the juices from the meat are garbage and should be thrown in the fire? I think collecting them is a great idea, and would make a very tasty addition to the sauce or back into the meat, just like you did. In fact, there is a place in Texas that does just that with their brisket drippings. Can't think of th ename...they spoke about doing it on tv. They said the briskets flavor the sauce, instead of the sauce flavoring the meat.

3) comparing BBQ pork to thit nuong is like comparing pancetta and bacon. They're made from the same piece but are 2 completely different, equally delicious, products. One has nothing to do with the other and i want to eat both depending on what i'm doing. Do i want pancetta for breakfast? no. Do i want bacon in carbonara? no (well, maybe sometimes depends on my mood). If your reference point for pork shoulder is thit nuong or bulgogi, i have a much simpler solution that what you're doing. Make thit nuong.
I don't understand these 2 items even being in the same paragraph. One is a thin sliced, super hot grilled shoulder, the other is a super tender smokey piece of meat. One has nothing to do with the other, and they are not mutually exclusive, they both need to exist, and neither one's existence detracts from the other, and neither should ever strive to be the other.
Many, maybe MOST people, have not had good BBQ, and therefore assume sauce is needed. Just because that's the case doesn't mean that properly cooked BBQ doesn't have it's place. Mine is neither dry, nor bland, and just because everyone else's is doesn't mean i should change my cooking methodology. Is it "flawed" because it isn't easy to do well? I guess it could be....but then so are many other things in life.
And why do you keep saying people say "throw those worthless juices in the fire"? You're the only one who has said that.

I'm sure your method produced a completely delicious product, but rather than making a blanket statement that it's "better" than any other method, maybe you should say it's "different". After all, "better" is a judgment call which you have no right to make on other people, lest you become one of those you so despise.
« Last Edit: August 15, 2010, 08:55:18 PM by Jmolinari »

Offline totm

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 989
Re: Pulled pork - traditionally flawed
« Reply #16 on: August 16, 2010, 07:45:58 AM »
<major snipage>
I'm sure your method produced a completely delicious product, but rather than making a blanket statement that it's "better" than any other method, maybe you should say it's "different". After all, "better" is a judgment call which you have no right to make on other people, lest you become one of those you so despise.
Therein lies the crux.  If Loundry had made the statement "I think my pulled pork is better" or "In my opinion my pulled pork is better", then it wouldn't come off so damn arrogant.

BTW JMo, quoting multiple paragraphs requires you to copy/paste the
Quote from: ...
tags around the paragraphs with you responding after each [/quote].  A bit laborious but sometimes helps to keep context.  You can do the same thing to combine responses to multiple posts.
"It's your last day on earth, what is your final bite to eat?" Eric Ripert

"A good potato with a slab of butter.  I'm a happy man." Joel Robuchon

Loundry

  • Guest
Re: Pulled pork - traditionally flawed
« Reply #17 on: August 16, 2010, 08:44:40 PM »
1) I can't disagree with you on the wine stuff. I dont drink wine, but i do laugh at people describing it. Coffee is somewhat similar and some descriptions make me laugh as well. But what do i care? I mean, if people WANT to taste starfruit and hints of boysenberry and overripe mangosteen who am i to tell them not to? If they derive enjoyment from "finding" these flavors, and enjoy discussing them in a group, why would it bother me, even if i think they're making it up? If it bothers you, or people belittle you for NOT tasting them, find a different crowd that doesn't judge you on what you can and can't taste. If THEY like to do that, i don't think it's up to you to tell me otherwise, then aren't you becoming like them?

It's not just coffee, but some people are trying to do the same thing with beer.  It's ridiculous.

Your question is insightful and multifaceted, so forgive me if my response is rambling.  Why should it bother me that people are claiming to enjoy flavors that are completely imaginary?  Because what they believe in is not true, and truth is worth standing up for.  But that's not why I harp about winers and their sham of a culture.  The reason I degrade them is because they have used their imaginary flavors as an excuse to insult and denigrate people, and the threat of said abuse to snooker even more people into believing in their bullshit.  Someone should stand up against that -- why can't it be I?  Perhaps you'll see that as making a mountain out of a molehill, and I'm okay with that.  Truth be told, I don't spend much time thinking about wine and winers.  But if it is, in fact, true that wine appreciation is an extremely expensive exercise in bullshit conformity, then shouldn't I be allowed to say so?  Shouldn't I have the right to tell people, "No, you don't have to invest in all that expensive wine.  Even the very best wine tasters in the world can't tell the difference between red wine and white wine."?  If that is, in fact, true, then don't people deserve to hear it?

There is no shortage of people in the world promoting the wine cult and asking for donations.  Surely there is room for me saying that there is another way.

I'm not even sure what the whole reference to computer programming means.

INTERCAL was a programming language that was designed deliberately to be hard to program in.  Writing trivial programs in INTERCAL is therefore seen as a feat of strength in programmers' culture.

2) When did i every say all the juices from the meat are garbage and should be thrown in the fire? I think collecting them is a great idea, and would make a very tasty addition to the sauce or back into the meat, just like you did. In fact, there is a place in Texas that does just that with their brisket drippings. Can't think of th ename...they spoke about doing it on tv. They said the briskets flavor the sauce, instead of the sauce flavoring the meat.

In other words, non-traditional.  I think you may agree with me more than you want to.

3) comparing BBQ pork to thit nuong is like comparing pancetta and bacon. They're made from the same piece but are 2 completely different, equally delicious, products. One has nothing to do with the other and i want to eat both depending on what i'm doing. Do i want pancetta for breakfast? no. Do i want bacon in carbonara? no (well, maybe sometimes depends on my mood).

I think bacon is superior to pancetta in every way.  Come to think of it, that reminds me of pork belly.  I have never once eaten a piece of "pork belly" in a nice-ish restaurant where I didn't immediately wish I was eating bacon instead after the first bite.  Note to chefs: if your pork belly is inferior to bacon, then you failed.  It should be called "The Bacon Test".

If your reference point for pork shoulder is thit nuong or bulgogi, i have a much simpler solution that what you're doing. Make thit nuong. I don't understand these 2 items even being in the same paragraph. One is a thin sliced, super hot grilled shoulder, the other is a super tender smokey piece of meat. One has nothing to do with the other, and they are not mutually exclusive, they both need to exist, and neither one's existence detracts from the other, and neither should ever strive to be the other.

I disagree.  Those are all preparations of a pork shoulder, some better than others.  I think pulled pork is the most boring of them all; furthermore, it's the most difficult to prepare with traditional methods.  And that's really what my criticism is about: the traditional method of cooking pork shoulder that BBQ chefs crow about and sucks just about everywhere.  I think it's because the traditional method puts the whole pork shoulder over a fire, with a very small surface-area-to-volume ratio, and lets all of the juices go to waste.  The ones that don't do this are rare enough to be non-traditional.  What's needed is innovation, not perfection of a flawed method.  Can pulled pork be better?  Of course it can!  I can make better in my electric roaster oven with liquid smoke.  (Well, I *do* put it on the Primo afterwards... call me a hypocrite...)  There's no telling what a talented, dedicated chef could do if he weren't hobbled by tradition.

I take it back.  Pernil is even more boring than pulled pork.  It's like Puerto Ricans tried pulled pork and said, "This has too much flavor and moisture.  More boring, please!"

Many, maybe MOST people, have not had good BBQ, and therefore assume sauce is needed.

It's not an assumption.  It's a justified effort to cover flaws in an inferior product.  It's amazing to people who eat BBQ when it "doesn't even need sauce".  Thit nuong doesn't need sauce, either.

Just because that's the case doesn't mean that properly cooked BBQ doesn't have it's place. Mine is neither dry, nor bland, and just because everyone else's is doesn't mean i should change my cooking methodology. Is it "flawed" because it isn't easy to do well? I guess it could be....but then so are many other things in life.

Perhaps you're cutting through the fury to get at the sound.  It's flawed because the tools are inferior.  BBQ chefs regard it as a matter of pride to turn out semi-decent product with flawed methods, just like some programmers regard it as a matter of pride to write a web browser in INTERCAL.

Case in point: a friend of mine used to take it as a source of great pride that he and his family would cook pulled pork.  (He even dreamed of opening his own BBQ restaurant he was so self-satisfied!)  His method was to evenly space single lit coals in a pattern on the bottom of the grill while simultaneously keeping a chimney starter lit and blazing with fresh coals.  He would constantly feed cold coals into the chimney starter and then extract them to replace, one by one, the coals in the grill that were expiring.  He used two probe thermometers to monitor the temperature of different parts of the grill to ensure that a temperature of 210 was being maintained.  It was fastidious and painstaking and took quite a bit of finesse.  He was intensely proud of his INTERCAL programming BBQ method.  I remember the first day I made pulled pork in the Alton Brown flower-pot method with the (gasp!) electric burner to generate smoke.  The look on his face was priceless when he tasted it.  (It was a C-, which is an A for pulled pork.)

And why do you keep saying people say "throw those worthless juices in the fire"? You're the only one who has said that.

For the same reason that I've said that some chefs' take on pizza sauce is "just throw some tomatoes on it": because there is functionally no difference between collecting the juices and then throwing them in the fire, and cooking the meat so that the juices fall into the fire.  And it's obvious: the juices are regarded as worthless, otherwise, why let them go to the fire?  (I suppose there is a difference in that the "traditional" method of waste is more slothful, lazy, and less deliberate.)  Most importantly, it puts the onus on the believers in the traditional method to defend their choice of wasting all of the juices.  It's an effort to get them to say, "But I don't throw all the juices into the fire!" for that moment of introspection that usually follows immediately afterward.

I'm sure your method produced a completely delicious product, but rather than making a blanket statement that it's "better" than any other method, maybe you should say it's "different". After all, "better" is a judgment call which you have no right to make on other people, lest you become one of those you so despise.

If my product has more flavor and less dried-out texture, then I don't see why it's wrong to call it "better".  That is, unless it's a valid preference to like dull and dried out gray meat and then claim it as an icon of cultural pride.  I think the South deserves better than that, but I could be wrong.  (FG, chime in here.)  And I don't think I'm in danger of becoming what I despise until I say, "Since everyone in Atlanta completely sucks at cooking BBQ, I'll just have get down from the cross and open my own BBQ restaurant" and follow through on that threat.  I'm just a lowly home cook with home cooking methods, so I think that's what makes it all the more poignant when my home cook methods beat the pants off of "pitmasters".  Maybe it has something to do with the inferior cooking methods they're beholden to obey.

Steve says the only way to really settle this is to have everybody bring their pulled pork over to my house and for us to have a tasting contest.  It would be fun, but not scientific at all.

Offline Jmolinari

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1717
    • Email
Re: Pulled pork - traditionally flawed
« Reply #18 on: August 17, 2010, 10:49:13 AM »
It's not just coffee, but some people are trying to do the same thing with beer.  It's ridiculous.

Your question is insightful and multifaceted, so forgive me if my response is rambling.  Why should it bother me that people are claiming to enjoy flavors that are completely imaginary?  Because what they believe in is not true, and truth is worth standing up for.  But that's not why I harp about winers and their sham of a culture.  The reason I degrade them is because they have used their imaginary flavors as an excuse to insult and denigrate people, and the threat of said abuse to snooker even more people into believing in their bullshit.  Someone should stand up against that -- why can't it be I?  Perhaps you'll see that as making a mountain out of a molehill, and I'm okay with that.  Truth be told, I don't spend much time thinking about wine and winers.  But if it is, in fact, true that wine appreciation is an extremely expensive exercise in bullshit conformity, then shouldn't I be allowed to say so?  Shouldn't I have the right to tell people, "No, you don't have to invest in all that expensive wine.  Even the very best wine tasters in the world can't tell the difference between red wine and white wine."?  If that is, in fact, true, then don't people deserve to hear it?

There is no shortage of people in the world promoting the wine cult and asking for donations.  Surely there is room for me saying that there is another way.

Who's to say the flavors are imaginary? Because YOU can't taste them, they're imaginary? Are you the arbiter of what can and can't be tasted? Didn't you already say you can't taste saffron, while everyone else in your group could? There are such things a super tasters...maybe you're the opposite, which is why you so enjoy strong strong flavors.

Isn't it entirely possible that the flavors ARE there and you just can't taste them? I'm fairly certain you haven't done brain scan of tasters to see if they're tasting something, and even if you did, i would be willing to bet that something WOULD show up on a CT scan because flavor is both physical and mental. If you're convinced that something has a flavor, you'll taste it. At that point is it still imaginary if you're actually tasting it? Given the lack of science behind flavor and tasting, i don't think you can say someone someone THINKS they're tasting is imaginary. I have had coffees from Ethiopia which tastes like someone put blueberries the machine instead of coffee grounds...no bull. Obviously there were NO blueberries there...so is that flavor imaginary? Or could it be that certain compounds in coffee that come out when the conditions are right for growth, processing, roasting, and brewing align to make it taste like blueberries?

Because YOU can't taste it doesn't make it not exist, any more than sailors 500 years ago thinking because they didn't see the roundness of the earth made it flat.

As for people who insult and denigrate those who can't taste something, well i won't comment. Obviously it's a crappy thing to do, but i don't hang around that kind of person, and i don't let them get to me. I wouldn't make fun of someone who doesn't like uni even though i love it. You can let it affect you all you want, it's your life, but it seems like a rather small concern in a world filled with considerably more important items, which i prefer to dedicate my attention to.

INTERCAL was a programming language that was designed deliberately to be hard to program in.  Writing trivial programs in INTERCAL is therefore seen as a feat of strength in programmers' culture.

Which is why it hasn't survived. Doesn't that tell you that maybe there is something to the BBQ method which explains its survival for hundreds of years?


In other words, non-traditional.  I think you may agree with me more than you want to.

What makes something "traditional" or "non-traditional"? This place in texas has been doing it for 20,30,40,100? years. Is it traditional? It is to them. So i'm not sure i understand your point.
I never disagreed that adding the juices back to the meat woulnd't be a good thing. I think it would be delicious. But that doesn't make NOT adding the juices bad. It makes it DIFFERENT.


I think bacon is superior to pancetta in every way.  Come to think of it, that reminds me of pork belly.  I have never once eaten a piece of "pork belly" in a nice-ish restaurant where I didn't immediately wish I was eating bacon instead after the first bite.  Note to chefs: if your pork belly is inferior to bacon, then you failed.  It should be called "The Bacon Test".

Here is where your argument falls flat, and you agree with my argument that all you're doing is stating your personal preferences. You're basically arguing that because YOU prefer bacon, there is no reason for pancetta to exist. Personally i much prefer pancetta to bacon, so....i guess we're at an impasse and should meet at 20 paces and high noon to see who is right? And the loser's meat choice will be removed from the world, because there can be no place for more than 1 item made with the same product, but using different methods.


I disagree.  Those are all preparations of a pork shoulder, some better than others.  I think pulled pork is the most boring of them all; furthermore, it's the most difficult to prepare with traditional methods.  And that's really what my criticism is about: the traditional method of cooking pork shoulder that BBQ chefs crow about and sucks just about everywhere.  I think it's because the traditional method puts the whole pork shoulder over a fire, with a very small surface-area-to-volume ratio, and lets all of the juices go to waste.  The ones that don't do this are rare enough to be non-traditional.  What's needed is innovation, not perfection of a flawed method.  Can pulled pork be better?  Of course it can!  I can make better in my electric roaster oven with liquid smoke.  (Well, I *do* put it on the Primo afterwards... call me a hypocrite...)  There's no telling what a talented, dedicated chef could do if he weren't hobbled by tradition.

I take it back.  Pernil is even more boring than pulled pork.  It's like Puerto Ricans tried pulled pork and said, "This has too much flavor and moisture.  More boring, please!"

So, i'm going to assume that from now until the end of your life you will consume no pork shoulder unless prepared as thit nuong. What would you? Wouldn't you be consuming something inferior? Wouldn't that be rather silly, KNOWING there is something clearly better, but still eating something else? That would strike me as outlandishly foolish. Again, maybe "better" should be "different"?

It's not an assumption.  It's a justified effort to cover flaws in an inferior product.  It's amazing to people who eat BBQ when it "doesn't even need sauce".  Thit nuong doesn't need sauce, either.

Thit nuong is made by marinating pork should in very strongly flavored products, and then is served with a sauce too.


Perhaps you're cutting through the fury to get at the sound.  It's flawed because the tools are inferior.  BBQ chefs regard it as a matter of pride to turn out semi-decent product with flawed methods, just like some programmers regard it as a matter of pride to write a web browser in INTERCAL.

Are there current day, commercial, competitive browsers written in itercal? i read on the web that INTERCAL is "Possibly the most elaborate and long-lived joke in the history of programming languages". It doesn't seem that it was ever intended to be used.

Don't you think there might be a reason that BBQ chefs still use the methods that have been around forever? Could it be b/c we ENJOY the product, or do you really believe that we're all being hoodwinked into liking it, including hundred, if not thousands of people who make an obsession out of it...and you're the only smart one who has seen through the baloney.

Case in point: a friend of mine used to take it as a source of great pride that he and his family would cook pulled pork.  (He even dreamed of opening his own BBQ restaurant he was so self-satisfied!)  His method was to evenly space single lit coals in a pattern on the bottom of the grill while simultaneously keeping a chimney starter lit and blazing with fresh coals.  He would constantly feed cold coals into the chimney starter and then extract them to replace, one by one, the coals in the grill that were expiring.  He used two probe thermometers to monitor the temperature of different parts of the grill to ensure that a temperature of 210 was being maintained.  It was fastidious and painstaking and took quite a bit of finesse.  He was intensely proud of his INTERCAL programming BBQ method.  I remember the first day I made pulled pork in the Alton Brown flower-pot method with the (gasp!) electric burner to generate smoke.  The look on his face was priceless when he tasted it.  (It was a C-, which is an A for pulled pork.)

Good for him. So? You make it sound like making BBQ is akin to writing a thesis on space and time travel. To me making BBQ is really pretty easy, actually CONSIDERABLY easier than the method you describe as your own. In fact, if there were a method which were flawed based on complexity it would be yours, based on my reading of it.

For the same reason that I've said that some chefs' take on pizza sauce is "just throw some tomatoes on it": because there is functionally no difference between collecting the juices and then throwing them in the fire, and cooking the meat so that the juices fall into the fire.  And it's obvious: the juices are regarded as worthless, otherwise, why let them go to the fire?  (I suppose there is a difference in that the "traditional" method of waste is more slothful, lazy, and less deliberate.)  Most importantly, it puts the onus on the believers in the traditional method to defend their choice of wasting all of the juices.  It's an effort to get them to say, "But I don't throw all the juices into the fire!" for that moment of introspection that usually follows immediately afterward.

If my product has more flavor and less dried-out texture, then I don't see why it's wrong to call it "better".  That is, unless it's a valid preference to like dull and dried out gray meat and then claim it as an icon of cultural pride.  I think the South deserves better than that, but I could be wrong.  (FG, chime in here.)  And I don't think I'm in danger of becoming what I despise until I say, "Since everyone in Atlanta completely sucks at cooking BBQ, I'll just have get down from the cross and open my own BBQ restaurant" and follow through on that threat.  I'm just a lowly home cook with home cooking methods, so I think that's what makes it all the more poignant when my home cook methods beat the pants off of "pitmasters".  Maybe it has something to do with the inferior cooking methods they're beholden to obey.



But what you fail to see repeatedly, is that your method does not create the same product. It created a different product, which to YOU may or may not be better.

Your strategy to argue your point by repeatedly describing bbq as "dull and dried out gray meat" does not work to convince anyone like a jedi mind trick. I've told you repeatedly that my BBQ is NOT dull, it isn't dried out and nor is it gray, and no matter how many times you generically describe BBQ as that, doesn't make it so. Maybe it works on convincing yourself that there is only 1 result in BBQ meat, and thats "dull and dried out and gray", because there can't possibly be any other result when made by someone other than Sonny's BBQ.

Your method of discussion implying you're a maroon because you like BBQ and THEREFORE "dull and dried out and gray" seems almost like a politician. Associate something variable with something negative, and by association anyone who like something in that variable field is automatically an idiot.
I guess next time i have a plate of pasta i'll remind myself that this isn't any good as it's "slimy, mushy, salty and sugary just like Chef Boyardee".

Offline uOTPia Dweller

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1193
Re: Pulled pork - traditionally flawed
« Reply #19 on: August 17, 2010, 11:57:26 AM »
I can taste the difference between veal and chicken, but Loundry can't. My taste buds are better than Loundry's.
Gospel of uOTPian dining http://scoopotp.com/author/joe-duffy/

Offline Lorenzo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 863
Re: Pulled pork - traditionally flawed
« Reply #20 on: August 17, 2010, 01:47:34 PM »
This is what happens when two engineers debate barbecue.

Offline Stew

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 18
Re: Pulled pork - traditionally flawed
« Reply #21 on: August 17, 2010, 04:06:50 PM »
This is what happens when two engineers debate barbecue.

http://www.slate.com/id/2240157

"Gambetta and Hertog write about a particular mind-set among engineers that disdains ambiguity and compromise. They might be more passionate about bringing order to their society and see the rigid, religious law put forward in radical Islam as the best way of achieving those goals. In online postings, Abdulmutallab expressed concern over the conflict between his secular lifestyle and more extreme religious views. "How should one put the balance right?" he wrote."

Offline LamarT

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 108
    • Email
Re: Pulled pork - traditionally flawed
« Reply #22 on: September 05, 2010, 11:03:04 AM »
I like this debate. As with language so the same for food (for me food is a language). A definition has several levels or meanings for a word.
A dish and a cut of meat have several uses and meanings. There is the universal and then there is the beautiful set of individual meanings/tastes/uses
that make food so beautiful and long lasting (by being able to change yet stay the same). I understand both sides to this debate. I am in the
"super taster" category so there is not much that I can add.
The debate is very healthy and necessary to a broader understanding of all food/techniques/tasting/methods.
It is obviously not just about pulled pork but about all of cuisine and that is very cool.

Offline Mike GadgetGeek Stock

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4048
  • Learn something from everyone.
    • Email
Re: Pulled pork - New Recipe
« Reply #23 on: September 13, 2013, 08:04:57 PM »


I saw a new recipe and am giving it a try.  I have three Boston Butts on the Big Green Egg right now, to be finished somewhere in the early morning. 

I'll share the recipe but understand it is not MY recipe I'm just trying a new/different thing with my Pork Butts this time.

....
« Last Edit: September 14, 2013, 06:28:14 AM by Mike GadgetGeek Stock »
Finding offense where none is intended is a form of selfishness.

When facts change, I change my mind.  What do you do?

It's a poor craftsman that blames his tools.

Offline Mike GadgetGeek Stock

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4048
  • Learn something from everyone.
    • Email
Re: Pulled pork - traditionally flawed
« Reply #24 on: November 16, 2014, 06:08:55 PM »


I just re-read this whole thread..  I'm glad I stayed out of it.   LOL

I am re-heating some amazing Big Green Egg smoked pork shoulder from a while back for sandwiches tonight.  It is so, so good to smell that remnant of that long, slow cooking and the smell of the pecan wood along with it as this pork heats up. 

Wonderful stuff leftovers.   :-)

................
Finding offense where none is intended is a form of selfishness.

When facts change, I change my mind.  What do you do?

It's a poor craftsman that blames his tools.

 

Powered by EzPortal
anything
anything
anything
anything
anything
anything