"Peter A" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> says...
>> On Tue, 4 Sep 2007 17:25:29 -0400, Peter A >
>> wrote:
>>
>> > If you have ever seen a clam, lobster, or
>> >oyster with a backbone
>>
>> Ok...start the ****ing contest. Seafood is seafood...unlike a pork
>> loin.
>>
>> I continue to believe that seafood is clams, mussels, squid, rainbow
>> trout, shark, flounder, shrimp, crawfish. Just because a shrimp
>> doesn't have gills, doesn't make it fowl. YMMV.
>>
>>
>
> Read before responding, please. The claim was that the term "fish"
> encompasses all seafood including lobster, oysters, etc. I was pointing
> out that this is false.
>
> By the way, shrimp have gills.
>
> --
> Peter Aitken

If it comes from the sea, why isn't it seafood? I suppose you could say
seaweed isn't seafood, since it's normally seen in Japanese cuisine, but not
what most of us would call "seafood restaurants".

On Tue, 04 Sep 2007 21:45:39 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
> wrote:

> at least 50

Only 50............???? I am insulted.

On Tue, 4 Sep 2007 18:27:57 -0400, Peter A >
wrote:

>shrimp have gills.

Oh...that changed EVERYTHING.

"Peter A" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> says...
>> "Peter A" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> > In article >,
>> > says...
>> >> On Tue, 4 Sep 2007 17:25:29 -0400, Peter A >
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > If you have ever seen a clam, lobster, or
>> >> >oyster with a backbone
>> >>
>> >> Ok...start the ****ing contest. Seafood is seafood...unlike a pork
>> >> loin.
>> >>
>> >> I continue to believe that seafood is clams, mussels, squid, rainbow
>> >> trout, shark, flounder, shrimp, crawfish. Just because a shrimp
>> >> doesn't have gills, doesn't make it fowl. YMMV.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> > Read before responding, please. The claim was that the term "fish"
>> > encompasses all seafood including lobster, oysters, etc. I was pointing
>> > out that this is false.
>> >
>> > By the way, shrimp have gills.
>> >
>> > --
>> > Peter Aitken
>>
>> If it comes from the sea, why isn't it seafood? I suppose you could say
>> seaweed isn't seafood, since it's normally seen in Japanese cuisine, but
>> not
>> what most of us would call "seafood restaurants".
>>
>
> Read before responding, please. The claim was that the term "fish"
> encompasses all seafood including lobster, oysters, etc. I was pointing
> out that this is false.
>
> Yes, I am repeating myself - but only because you obviously have not
> read or understood the message that you are responding to. This is not
> rocket science, people. PAY ATTENTION!
> Peter Aitken

Thanks, Peter. Always happy to read your gracious comments, which sometimes
suggest that your writing is perfect.

Peter wrote on Tue, 4 Sep 2007 17:25:29 -0400:

PA> In article <1LjDi.6264$kI5.2156@trnddc08>,
PA> says...
??>> IYHO, IMHO anything that uses gills is a fish and I don't
??>> see the necessity for distinguishing.
??>>
PA> That's just plan wrong, and not just in my opinion but in
PA> the opinion of all biologists and zoologists. By
PA> definition, fish have gills thru their entire life and a
PA> backbone. If you have ever seen a clam, lobster, or oyster
PA> with a backbone, please call Ripley's.

So what!



James Silverton
Potomac, Maryland

E-mail, with obvious alterations:
not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not

"Peter A" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> says...
>> On Tue, 4 Sep 2007 18:27:57 -0400, Peter A >
>> wrote:
>>
>> >shrimp have gills.
>>
>> Oh...that changed EVERYTHING.
>>
>>
>
> Instead of juvenile sarcasm, I suggest you try actually knowing
> something about a topic before posting. I know this is a drastic
> suggestion, but it is worth trying.
>
> You won't, of course.
> Peter Aitken


Your writing is perfect. Everyone else is imperfect for misunderstanding it.

On Tue, 4 Sep 2007 19:41:11 -0400, Peter A >
wrote:

> Why do I bother responding to someone who prefers to
>remain mired in ignorance?


Pete....you are becoming an OLD TIRED ACTRESS. Your responses are
NOT the BE ALL AND END ALL of thought.

"pavane" > wrote in message
...
>
> "JoeSpareBedroom" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "Peter A" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> In article >,
>>> says...
>>>> On Tue, 4 Sep 2007 18:27:57 -0400, Peter A >
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> >shrimp have gills.
>>>>
>>>> Oh...that changed EVERYTHING.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Instead of juvenile sarcasm, I suggest you try actually knowing
>>> something about a topic before posting. I know this is a drastic
>>> suggestion, but it is worth trying.
>>>
>>> You won't, of course.
>>> Peter Aitken
>>
>>
>> Your writing is perfect. Everyone else is imperfect for misunderstanding
>> it.
>
> Perhaps. Or more probably you are simply a cretin who cannot recognize
> simple fact when it seeps into your clouded tiny sphere of awareness.
>
> pavane
>

You're right. I'm a cretin and you are perfect.

"pavane" > wrote in message
...
>
> "JoeSpareBedroom" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "pavane" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>>
>>> "JoeSpareBedroom" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> "Peter A" > wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>>>> In article >,
>>>>> says...
>>>>>> On Tue, 4 Sep 2007 18:27:57 -0400, Peter A >
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> >shrimp have gills.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Oh...that changed EVERYTHING.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Instead of juvenile sarcasm, I suggest you try actually knowing
>>>>> something about a topic before posting. I know this is a drastic
>>>>> suggestion, but it is worth trying.
>>>>>
>>>>> You won't, of course.
>>>>> Peter Aitken
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Your writing is perfect. Everyone else is imperfect for
>>>> misunderstanding it.
>>>
>>> Perhaps. Or more probably you are simply a cretin who cannot recognize
>>> simple fact when it seeps into your clouded tiny sphere of awareness.
>>>
>>> pavane
>>>
>>
>> You're right. I'm a cretin and you are perfect.
>
> There. That didn't hurt a bit, did it?
>
> pavane
>

You are absolutely right. Now, go tell mother you want to be touched "there"
again.

Ward Abbott wrote:

> On Tue, 4 Sep 2007 19:41:11 -0400, Peter A >
> wrote:
>
> > Why do I bother responding to someone who prefers to
> >remain mired in ignorance?
>
>
> Pete....you are becoming an OLD TIRED ACTRESS. Your responses are
> NOT the BE ALL AND END ALL of thought.


Pete's turgidly dramatic style reminds me of old tired actress Susan
Hayward's style at it's very old tired worst, lol...

--
Best
Greg