Within the past few days, on pbs I believe, a woman showed a guy how to cook
steak strips on heated rocks outdoors. She mixed up an impromptu sauce with
apricot jam, about 1/2 cuip of mustard seeds, and something else -- I cannot
remember what the third ingredient was. Does anyone know? I am guessing
horseradish, something like that, huh?

thanks

jack

"Jackals" > wrote in message ...
| Within the past few days, on pbs I believe, a woman showed a guy how to cook
| steak strips on heated rocks outdoors. She mixed up an impromptu sauce with
| apricot jam, about 1/2 cuip of mustard seeds, and something else -- I cannot
| remember what the third ingredient was. Does anyone know? I am guessing
| horseradish, something like that, huh?

The only one on pbs that I can find is this, but it was for pork:
http://www.pbs.org/everydayfood/reci...ork_chops.html

If you do a Google or Bing search on "apricot mustard sauce" you will
find quite a few, you could pick and choose whatever sounds right.

pavane

On Sat, 15 Aug 2009 16:47:06 -0500, Jackals wrote:

> Within the past few days, on pbs I believe, a woman showed a guy how to cook
> steak strips on heated rocks outdoors. She mixed up an impromptu sauce with
> apricot jam, about 1/2 cuip of mustard seeds, and something else -- I cannot
> remember what the third ingredient was. Does anyone know? I am guessing
> horseradish, something like that, huh?

You need to find out the name of the show. Try looking at your
local PBS stations list of shows [for the past week].

I would guess vinegar. And add some onion.

-sw

"Sqwertz" > wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 15 Aug 2009 16:47:06 -0500, Jackals wrote:
>
>> Within the past few days, on pbs I believe, a woman showed a guy how to
>> cook
>> steak strips on heated rocks outdoors. She mixed up an impromptu sauce
>> with
>> apricot jam, about 1/2 cuip of mustard seeds, and something else -- I
>> cannot
>> remember what the third ingredient was. Does anyone know? I am guessing
>> horseradish, something like that, huh?
>
> You need to find out the name of the show. Try looking at your
> local PBS stations list of shows [for the past week].
>
> I would guess vinegar. And add some onion.
>
> -sw


> On Sat, 15 Aug 2009 16:47:06 -0500, Jackals wrote:
>
>> Within the past few days, on pbs I believe, a woman showed a guy how to
>> cook
>> steak strips on heated rocks outdoors. She mixed up an impromptu sauce
>> with
>> apricot jam, about 1/2 cup of mustard seeds, and something else -- I
>> cannot
>> remember what the third ingredient was. Does anyone know? I am guessing
>> horseradish, something like that, huh?
>
> You need to find out the name of the show. Try looking at your
> local PBS stations list of shows [for the past week].
>
> I would guess vinegar. And add some onion.
>
> -sw

Unfortunately I haven't a clue what the show was or who the folks were -- it
was one of those flipping the channels things where you just catch a
glimpse -- I'm even guessing at PBS, but pretty sure it was a public
station.

jack

Phluge wrote:
> "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On Sat, 15 Aug 2009 16:47:06 -0500, Jackals wrote:
>>
>>> Within the past few days, on pbs I believe, a woman showed a guy how to
>>> cook
>>> steak strips on heated rocks outdoors. She mixed up an impromptu sauce
>>> with
>>> apricot jam, about 1/2 cuip of mustard seeds, and something else -- I
>>> cannot
>>> remember what the third ingredient was. Does anyone know? I am guessing
>>> horseradish, something like that, huh?
>> You need to find out the name of the show. Try looking at your
>> local PBS stations list of shows [for the past week].
>>
>> I would guess vinegar. And add some onion.
>>
>> -sw
>
>
>> On Sat, 15 Aug 2009 16:47:06 -0500, Jackals wrote:
>>
>>> Within the past few days, on pbs I believe, a woman showed a guy how to
>>> cook
>>> steak strips on heated rocks outdoors. She mixed up an impromptu sauce
>>> with
>>> apricot jam, about 1/2 cup of mustard seeds, and something else -- I
>>> cannot
>>> remember what the third ingredient was. Does anyone know? I am guessing
>>> horseradish, something like that, huh?
>> You need to find out the name of the show. Try looking at your
>> local PBS stations list of shows [for the past week].
>>
>> I would guess vinegar. And add some onion.
>>
>> -sw
>
> Unfortunately I haven't a clue what the show was or who the folks were -- it
> was one of those flipping the channels things where you just catch a
> glimpse -- I'm even guessing at PBS, but pretty sure it was a public
> station.
>
> jack
>
>
But if you know the approximate time you were flipping the
channels, that should lead to the program's name.

--
Jean B.

Jackals wrote:
>
> Within the past few days, on pbs I believe, a woman showed a guy how to cook
> steak strips on heated rocks outdoors. She mixed up an impromptu sauce with
> apricot jam, about 1/2 cuip of mustard seeds, and something else -- I cannot
> remember what the third ingredient was. Does anyone know? I am guessing
> horseradish, something like that, huh?
>
> thanks
>
> jack

It was horseradish. Saw the same show LOL.

Phluge wrote:
>
> "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
> ...
> > On Sat, 15 Aug 2009 16:47:06 -0500, Jackals wrote:
> >
> >> Within the past few days, on pbs I believe, a woman showed a guy how to
> >> cook
> >> steak strips on heated rocks outdoors. She mixed up an impromptu sauce
> >> with
> >> apricot jam, about 1/2 cuip of mustard seeds, and something else -- I
> >> cannot
> >> remember what the third ingredient was. Does anyone know? I am guessing
> >> horseradish, something like that, huh?
> >
> > You need to find out the name of the show. Try looking at your
> > local PBS stations list of shows [for the past week].
> >
> > I would guess vinegar. And add some onion.
> >
> > -sw
>
> > On Sat, 15 Aug 2009 16:47:06 -0500, Jackals wrote:
> >
> >> Within the past few days, on pbs I believe, a woman showed a guy how to
> >> cook
> >> steak strips on heated rocks outdoors. She mixed up an impromptu sauce
> >> with
> >> apricot jam, about 1/2 cup of mustard seeds, and something else -- I
> >> cannot
> >> remember what the third ingredient was. Does anyone know? I am guessing
> >> horseradish, something like that, huh?
> >
> > You need to find out the name of the show. Try looking at your
> > local PBS stations list of shows [for the past week].
> >
> > I would guess vinegar. And add some onion.
> >
> > -sw
>
> Unfortunately I haven't a clue what the show was or who the folks were -- it
> was one of those flipping the channels things where you just catch a
> glimpse -- I'm even guessing at PBS, but pretty sure it was a public
> station.
>
> jack

Saw it on the 'Create' network. Show was 'Cultivating Life' and featured
stones in one way or another.

On Sat, 15 Aug 2009 18:11:56 -0600, Arri London wrote:

> Saw it on the 'Create' network. Show was 'Cultivating Life' and featured
> stones in one way or another.

Here it is:

<http://www.cultivatinglife.com/Steak-on-a-Stone-with-Italian-Mostarda-Strawberries-and-Cream-On-the-Rocks.html>

It was horseradish.

-sw

"Sqwertz" > wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 15 Aug 2009 18:11:56 -0600, Arri London wrote:
>
>> Saw it on the 'Create' network. Show was 'Cultivating Life' and featured
>> stones in one way or another.
>
> Here it is:
>
> <http://www.cultivatinglife.com/Steak-on-a-Stone-with-Italian-Mostarda-Strawberries-and-Cream-On-the-Rocks.html>
>
> It was horseradish.
>
> -sw

Excellent -- now I will go and make some. Thanks to all.

Jack

"Jackals" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On Sat, 15 Aug 2009 18:11:56 -0600, Arri London wrote:
>>
>>> Saw it on the 'Create' network. Show was 'Cultivating Life' and featured
>>> stones in one way or another.
>>
>> Here it is:
>>
>> <http://www.cultivatinglife.com/Steak-on-a-Stone-with-Italian-Mostarda-Strawberries-and-Cream-On-the-Rocks.html>
>>
>> It was horseradish.
>>
>> -sw
>
> Excellent -- now I will go and make some. Thanks to all.
>
> Jack

That's a combination I'd never have tried. Sounds interesting.

On Sat, 15 Aug 2009 22:59:04 -0400, "Ed Pawlowski" >
wrote:

>
>"Jackals" > wrote in message
...
>>
>> "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> On Sat, 15 Aug 2009 18:11:56 -0600, Arri London wrote:
>>>
>>>> Saw it on the 'Create' network. Show was 'Cultivating Life' and featured
>>>> stones in one way or another.
>>>
>>> Here it is:
>>>
>>> <http://www.cultivatinglife.com/Steak-on-a-Stone-with-Italian-Mostarda-Strawberries-and-Cream-On-the-Rocks.html>
>>>
>>> It was horseradish.
>>>
>>> -sw
>>
>> Excellent -- now I will go and make some. Thanks to all.
>>
>> Jack
>
>That's a combination I'd never have tried. Sounds interesting.
>
They want you to heat the stone 2-4 hours in the oven, fer cripes
sake! What happened to all the bleating about energy wasting and
heating up the kitchen? Be consistent people!

--
I love cooking with wine.
Sometimes I even put it in the food.

On Sun, 16 Aug 2009 03:21:03 -0700, sf wrote:

> They want you to heat the stone 2-4 hours in the oven, fer cripes
> sake! What happened to all the bleating about energy wasting and
> heating up the kitchen? Be consistent people!

Don't forget their mission statement:

"Cultivating Life explores how we've all moved out of our houses and
into our backyards. Each week, we celebrate how Americans are
reconnecting to the land."

-sw

Sqwertz wrote:
>
> On Sat, 15 Aug 2009 18:11:56 -0600, Arri London wrote:
>
> > Saw it on the 'Create' network. Show was 'Cultivating Life' and featured
> > stones in one way or another.
>
> Here it is:
>
> <http://www.cultivatinglife.com/Steak-on-a-Stone-with-Italian-Mostarda-Strawberries-and-Cream-On-the-Rocks.html>
>
> It was horseradish.
>
> -sw

TY that *was* what I said LOL. The strawberries and cream thing was a
real washout though. Frozen rock didn't add anything to the dish.

sf wrote:
>
> On Sat, 15 Aug 2009 22:59:04 -0400, "Ed Pawlowski" >
> wrote:
>
> >
> >"Jackals" > wrote in message
> ...
> >>
> >> "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >>> On Sat, 15 Aug 2009 18:11:56 -0600, Arri London wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Saw it on the 'Create' network. Show was 'Cultivating Life' and featured
> >>>> stones in one way or another.
> >>>
> >>> Here it is:
> >>>
> >>> <http://www.cultivatinglife.com/Steak-on-a-Stone-with-Italian-Mostarda-Strawberries-and-Cream-On-the-Rocks.html>
> >>>
> >>> It was horseradish.
> >>>
> >>> -sw
> >>
> >> Excellent -- now I will go and make some. Thanks to all.
> >>
> >> Jack
> >
> >That's a combination I'd never have tried. Sounds interesting.
> >
> They want you to heat the stone 2-4 hours in the oven, fer cripes
> sake! What happened to all the bleating about energy wasting and
> heating up the kitchen? Be consistent people!
>


It was heated on the grill rather than in the oven. Easy enough to cook
other foods in said grill while one is waiting...

sf wrote:
> On Sat, 15 Aug 2009 22:59:04 -0400, "Ed Pawlowski" >
> wrote:
>
>> "Jackals" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> On Sat, 15 Aug 2009 18:11:56 -0600, Arri London wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Saw it on the 'Create' network. Show was 'Cultivating Life' and featured
>>>>> stones in one way or another.
>>>> Here it is:
>>>>
>>>> <http://www.cultivatinglife.com/Steak-on-a-Stone-with-Italian-Mostarda-Strawberries-and-Cream-On-the-Rocks.html>
>>>>
>>>> It was horseradish.
>>>>
>>>> -sw
>>> Excellent -- now I will go and make some. Thanks to all.
>>>
>>> Jack
>> That's a combination I'd never have tried. Sounds interesting.
>>
> They want you to heat the stone 2-4 hours in the oven, fer cripes
> sake! What happened to all the bleating about energy wasting and
> heating up the kitchen? Be consistent people!
>

Not to mention, why would you want to do that when it takes minutes on a
gas grill, or a twenty minute warm-up on a charcoal grill (my
preference)? And why would primitive cultures do this rather than
putting it on a stick and roasting it?

I don't get it.

Bob

On Sun, 16 Aug 2009 17:52:08 -0600, Arri London wrote:

> Sqwertz wrote:

>> It was horseradish.
>
> TY that *was* what I said LOL.

Yeah, but you didn't take them time to look up the show and quote
the recipe!

Besides, I didn't see your post mentioning horseradish until after I
already posted the show. So there!

-sw

Bob Muncie wrote:
>
> sf wrote:
> > On Sat, 15 Aug 2009 22:59:04 -0400, "Ed Pawlowski" >
> > wrote:
> >
> >> "Jackals" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >>> "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
> >>> ...
> >>>> On Sat, 15 Aug 2009 18:11:56 -0600, Arri London wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Saw it on the 'Create' network. Show was 'Cultivating Life' and featured
> >>>>> stones in one way or another.
> >>>> Here it is:
> >>>>
> >>>> <http://www.cultivatinglife.com/Steak-on-a-Stone-with-Italian-Mostarda-Strawberries-and-Cream-On-the-Rocks.html>
> >>>>
> >>>> It was horseradish.
> >>>>
> >>>> -sw
> >>> Excellent -- now I will go and make some. Thanks to all.
> >>>
> >>> Jack
> >> That's a combination I'd never have tried. Sounds interesting.
> >>
> > They want you to heat the stone 2-4 hours in the oven, fer cripes
> > sake! What happened to all the bleating about energy wasting and
> > heating up the kitchen? Be consistent people!
> >
>
> Not to mention, why would you want to do that when it takes minutes on a
> gas grill, or a twenty minute warm-up on a charcoal grill (my
> preference)? And why would primitive cultures do this rather than
> putting it on a stick and roasting it?
>
> I don't get it.
>
> Bob

Our ancestors did indeed cook food over an open fire. However they
discovered that the rocks underneath the fire would stay hot for hours
after the wood burnt down. So foods that didn't work so well over the
live fire would cook just fine on hot rocks. Just like using charcoal in
the grill. Why not just burn wood? Because the charcoal lasts longer.

It's pointless today of course but with a limited fuel supply, hot-rock
cooking might make a lot of sense.

Sqwertz wrote:
>
> On Sun, 16 Aug 2009 17:52:08 -0600, Arri London wrote:
>
> > Sqwertz wrote:
>
> >> It was horseradish.
> >
> > TY that *was* what I said LOL.
>
> Yeah, but you didn't take them time to look up the show and quote
> the recipe!

LOL I saw the show. The OP was meant to do the homework

>
> Besides, I didn't see your post mentioning horseradish until after I
> already posted the show. So there!
>
> -sw

Pffftttt

Arri London wrote:
>
> Bob Muncie wrote:
>> sf wrote:
>>> On Sat, 15 Aug 2009 22:59:04 -0400, "Ed Pawlowski" >
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Jackals" > wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>>>> "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
>>>>> ...
>>>>>> On Sat, 15 Aug 2009 18:11:56 -0600, Arri London wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Saw it on the 'Create' network. Show was 'Cultivating Life' and featured
>>>>>>> stones in one way or another.
>>>>>> Here it is:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> <http://www.cultivatinglife.com/Steak-on-a-Stone-with-Italian-Mostarda-Strawberries-and-Cream-On-the-Rocks.html>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It was horseradish.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -sw
>>>>> Excellent -- now I will go and make some. Thanks to all.
>>>>>
>>>>> Jack
>>>> That's a combination I'd never have tried. Sounds interesting.
>>>>
>>> They want you to heat the stone 2-4 hours in the oven, fer cripes
>>> sake! What happened to all the bleating about energy wasting and
>>> heating up the kitchen? Be consistent people!
>>>
>> Not to mention, why would you want to do that when it takes minutes on a
>> gas grill, or a twenty minute warm-up on a charcoal grill (my
>> preference)? And why would primitive cultures do this rather than
>> putting it on a stick and roasting it?
>>
>> I don't get it.
>>
>> Bob
>
> Our ancestors did indeed cook food over an open fire. However they
> discovered that the rocks underneath the fire would stay hot for hours
> after the wood burnt down. So foods that didn't work so well over the
> live fire would cook just fine on hot rocks. Just like using charcoal in
> the grill. Why not just burn wood? Because the charcoal lasts longer.
>
> It's pointless today of course but with a limited fuel supply, hot-rock
> cooking might make a lot of sense.

Arri - I don't doubt there was a use for hot rocks in the dim past.
Especially when cooking containers were lacking.

But since there is little use for it today (other than historic), I
would consider the current use as a waste of resources, and flavor :-)

Bob

Arri London wrote:
>
> Bob Muncie wrote:
> >
> > Arri London wrote:
> > >
> > > Bob Muncie wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> > > Our ancestors did indeed cook food over an open fire. However they
> > > discovered that the rocks underneath the fire would stay hot for hours
> > > after the wood burnt down. So foods that didn't work so well over the
> > > live fire would cook just fine on hot rocks. Just like using charcoal in
> > > the grill. Why not just burn wood? Because the charcoal lasts longer.
> > >
> > > It's pointless today of course but with a limited fuel supply, hot-rock
> > > cooking might make a lot of sense.
> >
> > Arri - I don't doubt there was a use for hot rocks in the dim past.
> > Especially when cooking containers were lacking.
> >
> > But since there is little use for it today (other than historic), I
> > would consider the current use as a waste of resources, and flavor :-)
>
> It's a gimmick of course. But why would it waste flavour? A very hot
> rock would cook meats quickly, which isn't a bad thing. Some restaurants
> in Hawaii cook food in hot lava. Hardly necessary but the tourists love
> it.

The new (individual serving) "teppanyaki" ?? =

Sky

--
Ultra Ultimate Kitchen Rule - Use the Timer!
Ultimate Kitchen Rule -- Cook's Choice!!

Bob Muncie wrote:
>
> Arri London wrote:
> >
> > Bob Muncie wrote:

<snip>

> > Our ancestors did indeed cook food over an open fire. However they
> > discovered that the rocks underneath the fire would stay hot for hours
> > after the wood burnt down. So foods that didn't work so well over the
> > live fire would cook just fine on hot rocks. Just like using charcoal in
> > the grill. Why not just burn wood? Because the charcoal lasts longer.
> >
> > It's pointless today of course but with a limited fuel supply, hot-rock
> > cooking might make a lot of sense.
>
> Arri - I don't doubt there was a use for hot rocks in the dim past.
> Especially when cooking containers were lacking.
>
> But since there is little use for it today (other than historic), I
> would consider the current use as a waste of resources, and flavor :-)


It's a gimmick of course. But why would it waste flavour? A very hot
rock would cook meats quickly, which isn't a bad thing. Some restaurants
in Hawaii cook food in hot lava. Hardly necessary but the tourists love
it.

Arri London wrote:
>
> Bob Muncie wrote:
>> Arri London wrote:
>>> Bob Muncie wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>>> Our ancestors did indeed cook food over an open fire. However they
>>> discovered that the rocks underneath the fire would stay hot for hours
>>> after the wood burnt down. So foods that didn't work so well over the
>>> live fire would cook just fine on hot rocks. Just like using charcoal in
>>> the grill. Why not just burn wood? Because the charcoal lasts longer.
>>>
>>> It's pointless today of course but with a limited fuel supply, hot-rock
>>> cooking might make a lot of sense.
>> Arri - I don't doubt there was a use for hot rocks in the dim past.
>> Especially when cooking containers were lacking.
>>
>> But since there is little use for it today (other than historic), I
>> would consider the current use as a waste of resources, and flavor :-)
>
>
> It's a gimmick of course. But why would it waste flavour? A very hot
> rock would cook meats quickly, which isn't a bad thing. Some restaurants
> in Hawaii cook food in hot lava. Hardly necessary but the tourists love
> it.

Not knocking your thoughts... But I'd *much* rather have something
roasted over a gill (or fire) of some type, or in the oven, than for it
to sit on a rock.

Bob

Bob Muncie wrote:
> Arri London wrote:
>>
>> Bob Muncie wrote:
>>> Arri London wrote:
>>>> Bob Muncie wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>>> Our ancestors did indeed cook food over an open fire. However they
>>>> discovered that the rocks underneath the fire would stay hot for hours
>>>> after the wood burnt down. So foods that didn't work so well over the
>>>> live fire would cook just fine on hot rocks. Just like using
>>>> charcoal in
>>>> the grill. Why not just burn wood? Because the charcoal lasts longer.
>>>>
>>>> It's pointless today of course but with a limited fuel supply, hot-rock
>>>> cooking might make a lot of sense.
>>> Arri - I don't doubt there was a use for hot rocks in the dim past.
>>> Especially when cooking containers were lacking.
>>>
>>> But since there is little use for it today (other than historic), I
>>> would consider the current use as a waste of resources, and flavor :-)
>>
>>
>> It's a gimmick of course. But why would it waste flavour? A very hot
>> rock would cook meats quickly, which isn't a bad thing. Some restaurants
>> in Hawaii cook food in hot lava. Hardly necessary but the tourists love
>> it.
>
> Not knocking your thoughts... But I'd *much* rather have something
> roasted over a gill (or fire) of some type, or in the oven, than for it
> to sit on a rock.
>
> Bob
^gill^^grill^

Sky wrote:
>
> Arri London wrote:
> >
> > Bob Muncie wrote:
> > >
> > > Arri London wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Bob Muncie wrote:
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> > > > Our ancestors did indeed cook food over an open fire. However they
> > > > discovered that the rocks underneath the fire would stay hot for hours
> > > > after the wood burnt down. So foods that didn't work so well over the
> > > > live fire would cook just fine on hot rocks. Just like using charcoal in
> > > > the grill. Why not just burn wood? Because the charcoal lasts longer.
> > > >
> > > > It's pointless today of course but with a limited fuel supply, hot-rock
> > > > cooking might make a lot of sense.
> > >
> > > Arri - I don't doubt there was a use for hot rocks in the dim past.
> > > Especially when cooking containers were lacking.
> > >
> > > But since there is little use for it today (other than historic), I
> > > would consider the current use as a waste of resources, and flavor :-)
> >
> > It's a gimmick of course. But why would it waste flavour? A very hot
> > rock would cook meats quickly, which isn't a bad thing. Some restaurants
> > in Hawaii cook food in hot lava. Hardly necessary but the tourists love
> > it.
>
> The new (individual serving) "teppanyaki" ?? =
>
> Sky


Why not

Bob Muncie wrote:
>
> Bob Muncie wrote:
> > Arri London wrote:
> >>
> >> Bob Muncie wrote:
> >>> Arri London wrote:
> >>>> Bob Muncie wrote:
> >>
> >> <snip>
> >>
> >>>> Our ancestors did indeed cook food over an open fire. However they
> >>>> discovered that the rocks underneath the fire would stay hot for hours
> >>>> after the wood burnt down. So foods that didn't work so well over the
> >>>> live fire would cook just fine on hot rocks. Just like using
> >>>> charcoal in
> >>>> the grill. Why not just burn wood? Because the charcoal lasts longer.
> >>>>
> >>>> It's pointless today of course but with a limited fuel supply, hot-rock
> >>>> cooking might make a lot of sense.
> >>> Arri - I don't doubt there was a use for hot rocks in the dim past.
> >>> Especially when cooking containers were lacking.
> >>>
> >>> But since there is little use for it today (other than historic), I
> >>> would consider the current use as a waste of resources, and flavor :-)
> >>
> >>
> >> It's a gimmick of course. But why would it waste flavour? A very hot
> >> rock would cook meats quickly, which isn't a bad thing. Some restaurants
> >> in Hawaii cook food in hot lava. Hardly necessary but the tourists love
> >> it.
> >
> > Not knocking your thoughts... But I'd *much* rather have something
> > roasted over a gill (or fire) of some type, or in the oven, than for it
> > to sit on a rock.
> >
> > Bob
> ^gill^^grill^

LOL maybe cooking on fish gills will be come the next big thing....

On Wed, 19 Aug 2009 17:21:15 -0600, Arri London >
wrote:

>
>
>Bob Muncie wrote:
>>
>> Arri London wrote:
>> >
>> > Bob Muncie wrote:
>

>It's a gimmick of course. But why would it waste flavour? A very hot
>rock would cook meats quickly, which isn't a bad thing. Some restaurants
>in Hawaii cook food in hot lava. Hardly necessary but the tourists love
>it.
Just as a point of fact, I doubt seriously that any chefs cook in hot
lava. TOO HOT! Maybe they use former lava rocks but among other
things, hot lava is not even available unless you go out to the lava
flow which is about 2.5 hours from the nearest airport. It is molten
rock and can not even be carried. You can't even stand next to molten
lava except for a quick second. I think those chefs were tricking
you. Cold former lava rocks heated up, yes, but not hot lava.

aloha,
Cea

pure kona wrote:
> On Wed, 19 Aug 2009 17:21:15 -0600, Arri London >
> wrote:
>
>>
>> Bob Muncie wrote:
>>> Arri London wrote:
>>>> Bob Muncie wrote:
>
>> It's a gimmick of course. But why would it waste flavour? A very hot
>> rock would cook meats quickly, which isn't a bad thing. Some restaurants
>> in Hawaii cook food in hot lava. Hardly necessary but the tourists love
>> it.
> Just as a point of fact, I doubt seriously that any chefs cook in hot
> lava. TOO HOT! Maybe they use former lava rocks but among other
> things, hot lava is not even available unless you go out to the lava
> flow which is about 2.5 hours from the nearest airport. It is molten
> rock and can not even be carried. You can't even stand next to molten
> lava except for a quick second. I think those chefs were tricking
> you. Cold former lava rocks heated up, yes, but not hot lava.
>
> aloha,
> Cea

That's a good point I didn't consider.

If the heat source is volcanic in nature, I certainly would have used it
( many moons ago). I did not consider local useage.

Bob

Arri London wrote:
>
> Bob Muncie wrote:
> >
> > Bob Muncie wrote:
> > > Arri London wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Bob Muncie wrote:
> > >>> Arri London wrote:
> > >>>> Bob Muncie wrote:
> > >>
> > >> <snip>
> > >>
> > >>>> Our ancestors did indeed cook food over an open fire. However they
> > >>>> discovered that the rocks underneath the fire would stay hot for hours
> > >>>> after the wood burnt down. So foods that didn't work so well over the
> > >>>> live fire would cook just fine on hot rocks. Just like using
> > >>>> charcoal in
> > >>>> the grill. Why not just burn wood? Because the charcoal lasts longer.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> It's pointless today of course but with a limited fuel supply, hot-rock
> > >>>> cooking might make a lot of sense.
> > >>> Arri - I don't doubt there was a use for hot rocks in the dim past.
> > >>> Especially when cooking containers were lacking.
> > >>>
> > >>> But since there is little use for it today (other than historic), I
> > >>> would consider the current use as a waste of resources, and flavor :-)
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> It's a gimmick of course. But why would it waste flavour? A very hot
> > >> rock would cook meats quickly, which isn't a bad thing. Some restaurants
> > >> in Hawaii cook food in hot lava. Hardly necessary but the tourists love
> > >> it.
> > >
> > > Not knocking your thoughts... But I'd *much* rather have something
> > > roasted over a gill (or fire) of some type, or in the oven, than for it
> > > to sit on a rock.
> > >
> > > Bob
> > ^gill^^grill^
>
> LOL maybe cooking on fish gills will be come the next big thing....

Hehehehe ---- perhaps he's gilling his grills??? or is that grilling the
gills? oh well, either way - they're cooked, eh?! <G>

Sky

--
Ultra Ultimate Kitchen Rule - Use the Timer!
Ultimate Kitchen Rule -- Cook's Choice!!

Sky wrote:
> Arri London wrote:
>> Bob Muncie wrote:
>>> Bob Muncie wrote:
>>>> Arri London wrote:
>>>>> Bob Muncie wrote:
>>>>>> Arri London wrote:
>>>>>>> Bob Muncie wrote:
>>>>> <snip>
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Our ancestors did indeed cook food over an open fire. However they
>>>>>>> discovered that the rocks underneath the fire would stay hot for hours
>>>>>>> after the wood burnt down. So foods that didn't work so well over the
>>>>>>> live fire would cook just fine on hot rocks. Just like using
>>>>>>> charcoal in
>>>>>>> the grill. Why not just burn wood? Because the charcoal lasts longer.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It's pointless today of course but with a limited fuel supply, hot-rock
>>>>>>> cooking might make a lot of sense.
>>>>>> Arri - I don't doubt there was a use for hot rocks in the dim past.
>>>>>> Especially when cooking containers were lacking.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But since there is little use for it today (other than historic), I
>>>>>> would consider the current use as a waste of resources, and flavor :-)
>>>>>
>>>>> It's a gimmick of course. But why would it waste flavour? A very hot
>>>>> rock would cook meats quickly, which isn't a bad thing. Some restaurants
>>>>> in Hawaii cook food in hot lava. Hardly necessary but the tourists love
>>>>> it.
>>>> Not knocking your thoughts... But I'd *much* rather have something
>>>> roasted over a gill (or fire) of some type, or in the oven, than for it
>>>> to sit on a rock.
>>>>
>>>> Bob
>>> ^gill^^grill^
>> LOL maybe cooking on fish gills will be come the next big thing....
>
> Hehehehe ---- perhaps he's gilling his grills??? or is that grilling the
> gills? oh well, either way - they're cooked, eh?! <G>
>
> Sky
>

Sky - Id invite you (or any other stranger) to my table, if they were
hungry, and near my home.

Bob

Bob Muncie wrote:
> Arri London wrote:

>
> Not knocking your thoughts... But I'd *much* rather have something
> roasted over a gill (or fire) of some type, or in the oven, than for it
> to sit on a rock.
>
> Bob



When we were in N.Z. we ate at a restaurant that featured "stone grill"
cooking. Each diner got a platter with vegetables and sauces and a
thick slab of very smooth black stone (heated to VERY hot) with his or
her choice of meat (beef filet, lamb, chicken or fish) on the stone.

You flipped the meat (or sliced it and turned it over and over on the
stone) until it was cooked to taste. I wouldn't want it all the time
but it was very tasty and a fun experience for the group.

gloria p

Bob Muncie wrote:
> pure kona wrote:
>> On Wed, 19 Aug 2009 17:21:15 -0600, Arri London >
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Bob Muncie wrote:
>>>> Arri London wrote:
>>>>> Bob Muncie wrote:
>>
>>> It's a gimmick of course. But why would it waste flavour? A very hot
>>> rock would cook meats quickly, which isn't a bad thing. Some restaurants
>>> in Hawaii cook food in hot lava. Hardly necessary but the tourists love
>>> it.
>> Just as a point of fact, I doubt seriously that any chefs cook in hot
>> lava. TOO HOT! Maybe they use former lava rocks but among other
>> things, hot lava is not even available unless you go out to the lava
>> flow which is about 2.5 hours from the nearest airport. It is molten
>> rock and can not even be carried. You can't even stand next to molten
>> lava except for a quick second. I think those chefs were tricking
>> you. Cold former lava rocks heated up, yes, but not hot lava.
>> aloha,
>> Cea
>


In Rotorua, NZ, they cook (for tourists) in thermal pools amidst the
geysers. We had mussels, kumara, chicken, (and I can't remember what
else) suspended in the bubbling pools in woven flax baskets.

gloria p

Gloria P wrote:
> Bob Muncie wrote:
>> pure kona wrote:
>>> On Wed, 19 Aug 2009 17:21:15 -0600, Arri London >
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Bob Muncie wrote:
>>>>> Arri London wrote:
>>>>>> Bob Muncie wrote:
>>>
>>>> It's a gimmick of course. But why would it waste flavour? A very hot
>>>> rock would cook meats quickly, which isn't a bad thing. Some
>>>> restaurants
>>>> in Hawaii cook food in hot lava. Hardly necessary but the tourists love
>>>> it.
>>> Just as a point of fact, I doubt seriously that any chefs cook in hot
>>> lava. TOO HOT! Maybe they use former lava rocks but among other
>>> things, hot lava is not even available unless you go out to the lava
>>> flow which is about 2.5 hours from the nearest airport. It is molten
>>> rock and can not even be carried. You can't even stand next to molten
>>> lava except for a quick second. I think those chefs were tricking
>>> you. Cold former lava rocks heated up, yes, but not hot lava.
>>> aloha,
>>> Cea
>>
>
>
> In Rotorua, NZ, they cook (for tourists) in thermal pools amidst the
> geysers. We had mussels, kumara, chicken, (and I can't remember what
> else) suspended in the bubbling pools in woven flax baskets.
>
> gloria p


Hi Gloria -

I guess I didn't express what I was thinking in a logical way.

I was not knocking the process of cooking on hot rocks, as much as I
didn't/don't under stand why it would be a chosen way to to cook in
these more modern times.

Cooking on the grill (gas or charcoal), or inside on a stove top, or
within the oven, seems to all be preferred ways to cook in comparison to
using a "hot" rock.

I see no advantage to using a rock.

Bob

Bob Muncie wrote:

> I was not knocking the process of cooking on hot rocks, as much as I
> didn't/don't under stand why it would be a chosen way to to cook in these
> more modern times.
>
> Cooking on the grill (gas or charcoal), or inside on a stove top, or
> within the oven, seems to all be preferred ways to cook in comparison to
> using a "hot" rock.
>
> I see no advantage to using a rock.

It's more FUN! Like fondue, shabu-shabu, or the Korean restaurants with a
grill in the middle of the table, it provides an opportunity for the diner
to play with his or her food.

Bob

Gloria P > wrote in news:7f3s0pF2ir81jU1
@mid.individual.net:


>
> When we were in N.Z. we ate at a restaurant that featured "stone grill"
> cooking. Each diner got a platter with vegetables and sauces and a
> thick slab of very smooth black stone (heated to VERY hot) with his or
> her choice of meat (beef filet, lamb, chicken or fish) on the stone.
>
> You flipped the meat (or sliced it and turned it over and over on the
> stone) until it was cooked to taste. I wouldn't want it all the time
> but it was very tasty and a fun experience for the group.
>
> gloria p
>

There's a Stone Grill restaurant locally. I walk past it quite often when I
go into Penrith but we've never been there. Sounds like it might be a place
best visited with a group.

--
Rhonda Anderson
Cranebrook, NSW, Australia

Core of my heart, my country! Land of the rainbow gold,
For flood and fire and famine she pays us back threefold.
My Country, Dorothea MacKellar, 1904

Sky wrote:
>
> Arri London wrote:
> >
> > Bob Muncie wrote:
>

<snip>

> > > > Not knocking your thoughts... But I'd *much* rather have something
> > > > roasted over a gill (or fire) of some type, or in the oven, than for it
> > > > to sit on a rock.
> > > >
> > > > Bob
> > > ^gill^^grill^
> >
> > LOL maybe cooking on fish gills will be come the next big thing....
>
> Hehehehe ---- perhaps he's gilling his grills??? or is that grilling the
> gills? oh well, either way - they're cooked, eh?! <G>
>
> Sky

There ya go!

pure kona wrote:
>
> On Wed, 19 Aug 2009 17:21:15 -0600, Arri London >
> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >Bob Muncie wrote:
> >>
> >> Arri London wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Bob Muncie wrote:
> >
>
> >It's a gimmick of course. But why would it waste flavour? A very hot
> >rock would cook meats quickly, which isn't a bad thing. Some restaurants
> >in Hawaii cook food in hot lava. Hardly necessary but the tourists love
> >it.
> Just as a point of fact, I doubt seriously that any chefs cook in hot
> lava. TOO HOT! Maybe they use former lava rocks but among other
> things, hot lava is not even available unless you go out to the lava
> flow which is about 2.5 hours from the nearest airport. It is molten
> rock and can not even be carried. You can't even stand next to molten
> lava except for a quick second. I think those chefs were tricking
> you. Cold former lava rocks heated up, yes, but not hot lava.
>
> aloha,
> Cea

What I understood is that they were near the *edges* of a live lava
flow. The lava is red rather than white hot. It wasn't rocks heated up,
which would be very ordinary.

On Thu, 20 Aug 2009 17:17:52 -0600, Arri London >
wrote:

>
>
>pure kona wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 19 Aug 2009 17:21:15 -0600, Arri London >
>> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >
>> >Bob Muncie wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Arri London wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > Bob Muncie wrote:
>> >
>>
>> >It's a gimmick of course. But why would it waste flavour? A very hot
>> >rock would cook meats quickly, which isn't a bad thing. Some restaurants
>> >in Hawaii cook food in hot lava. Hardly necessary but the tourists love
>> >it.
>> Just as a point of fact, I doubt seriously that any chefs cook in hot
>> lava. TOO HOT! Maybe they use former lava rocks but among other
>> things, hot lava is not even available unless you go out to the lava
>> flow which is about 2.5 hours from the nearest airport. It is molten
>> rock and can not even be carried. You can't even stand next to molten
>> lava except for a quick second. I think those chefs were tricking
>> you. Cold former lava rocks heated up, yes, but not hot lava.
>>
>> aloha,
>> Cea
>
>What I understood is that they were near the *edges* of a live lava
>flow. The lava is red rather than white hot. It wasn't rocks heated up,
>which would be very ordinary.

The nearest airport to a ongoing lava flow is about 2 hours and on the
island of Hawaii - aka as the Big Island. Yes molten lava is red and
oozing as it moves, but it gets a gray crust on top as it cools. Here
is what one can see in terms of eruptions and lava.
http://hvo.wr.usgs.gov/cams/ Even if you were close to Volcano I still
doubt the chef would cook on molten rock. Just nobody I've ever heard
does that. If you put a dry stick into the molten lava as I have, it
immediately catches on fire- and you can't stand near the molten lava
for long. Promise.

aloha,
Cea

On Thu, 20 Aug 2009 13:53:48 -1000, pure kona >
wrote:

>On Thu, 20 Aug 2009 17:17:52 -0600, Arri London >
>wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>pure kona wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, 19 Aug 2009 17:21:15 -0600, Arri London >
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >Bob Muncie wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> Arri London wrote:
>>> >> >
>>> >> > Bob Muncie wrote:
>>> >
>>>
>>> >It's a gimmick of course. But why would it waste flavour? A very hot
>>> >rock would cook meats quickly, which isn't a bad thing. Some restaurants
>>> >in Hawaii cook food in hot lava. Hardly necessary but the tourists love
>>> >it.
>>> Just as a point of fact, I doubt seriously that any chefs cook in hot
>>> lava. TOO HOT! Maybe they use former lava rocks but among other
>>> things, hot lava is not even available unless you go out to the lava
>>> flow which is about 2.5 hours from the nearest airport. It is molten
>>> rock and can not even be carried. You can't even stand next to molten
>>> lava except for a quick second. I think those chefs were tricking
>>> you. Cold former lava rocks heated up, yes, but not hot lava.
>>>
>>> aloha,
>>> Cea
>>
>>What I understood is that they were near the *edges* of a live lava
>>flow. The lava is red rather than white hot. It wasn't rocks heated up,
>>which would be very ordinary.
>
>The nearest airport to a ongoing lava flow is about 2 hours and on the
>island of Hawaii - aka as the Big Island. Yes molten lava is red and
>oozing as it moves, but it gets a gray crust on top as it cools. Here
>is what one can see in terms of eruptions and lava.
>http://hvo.wr.usgs.gov/cams/ Even if you were close to Volcano I still
>doubt the chef would cook on molten rock. Just nobody I've ever heard
>does that. If you put a dry stick into the molten lava as I have, it
>immediately catches on fire- and you can't stand near the molten lava
>for long. Promise.
>
>aloha,
>Cea
By the way the only molten lava I know of in the choices I gave you is
the Thanksgiving Breakout camera.

aloha,
Cea

On Aug 16, 5:21*am, sf > wrote:
> On Sat, 15 Aug 2009 22:59:04 -0400, "Ed Pawlowski" >
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >"Jackals" > wrote in message
> ...
>
> >> "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
> ...
> >>> On Sat, 15 Aug 2009 18:11:56 -0600, Arri London wrote:
>
> >>>> Saw it on the 'Create' network. Show was 'Cultivating Life' and featured
> >>>> stones in one way or another.
>
> >>> Here it is:
>
> >>> <http://www.cultivatinglife.com/Steak-on-a-Stone-with-Italian-Mostarda...>
>
> >>> It was horseradish.
>
> >>> -sw
>
> >> Excellent -- now I will go and make some. Thanks to all.
>
> >> Jack
>
> >That's a combination I'd never have tried. *Sounds interesting.
>
> They want you to heat the stone 2-4 hours in the oven, fer cripes
> sake! *What happened to all the bleating about energy wasting and
> heating up the kitchen? *Be consistent people!
>
> --
> I love cooking with wine.
> Sometimes I even put it in the food.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

It could easily be heated in a fire pit outdoors, no?

N.

On Fri, 21 Aug 2009 09:36:28 -0700 (PDT), Nancy2
> wrote:

>On Aug 16, 5:21*am, sf > wrote:
>> On Sat, 15 Aug 2009 22:59:04 -0400, "Ed Pawlowski" >
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >"Jackals" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>
>> >> "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> >>> On Sat, 15 Aug 2009 18:11:56 -0600, Arri London wrote:
>>
>> >>>> Saw it on the 'Create' network. Show was 'Cultivating Life' and featured
>> >>>> stones in one way or another.
>>
>> >>> Here it is:
>>
>> >>> <http://www.cultivatinglife.com/Steak-on-a-Stone-with-Italian-Mostarda...>
>>
>> >>> It was horseradish.
>>
>> >>> -sw
>>
>> >> Excellent -- now I will go and make some. Thanks to all.
>>
>> >> Jack
>>
>> >That's a combination I'd never have tried. *Sounds interesting.
>>
>> They want you to heat the stone 2-4 hours in the oven, fer cripes
>> sake! *What happened to all the bleating about energy wasting and
>> heating up the kitchen? *Be consistent people!
>>
>It could easily be heated in a fire pit outdoors, no?
>

It specified heating the stone in an oven. I have no problem with
heating it in an outdoor fire as long as people are enjoying
themselves next to it while it burns.


--
I love cooking with wine.
Sometimes I even put it in the food.