Scout wrote:
Thanks Seahag,
Don't listen to Scotty, he's just jealous! I made my own out of an old 300
gallon oil tank.

How long did the 300 gallons of oil burn?

DSK

Dang! You could spit roast a cow in that!

Seahag

"Scout" wrote:
Thanks Seahag,
Don't listen to Scotty, he's just jealous! I made my own out of an old 300
gallon oil tank.
Scout

"Seahag" wrote:
Good for Scout! We had a couple of really nice fires over the weekend.
I just love watching a wood fi^)

Seahag

"Scott Vernon" wrote:
Oh, one of those yuppie fireplace things, I think Scout has one too.


"Seahag" wrote:
Freestanding outdoor fireplace thingamabob for Tim's (grey haired
dude from
the boatyard?) backyard so we don't freeze running Scupper! Sheesh!

Out here we have Peet's Coffee. The owner and the original owner of
Starbucks used to be partners I believe. When they split, the deal was
supposed to be neither would operate in the other's territory. Peet's a very
small. Just a few stores. The coffee is a heck of a lot better.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Scott Vernon" wrote in message
...
If Starbucks is so bad, how come there's one on every corner? They
seem to be busy.

SV

"Michael" wrote in message
...
Doug you have it right again. I say if you want to be snobbish
about
something make it worthwhile. Now being from the great PNW I'm
proud to be
a bona fide Seattle Coffee Snob. Ahhhh...a good dark roast is just
the
thing when properly made. None of that commercialized Starbucks
Crap-ola.
We sensitive palates demand and get better fare. Starbucks is for
the rest
of the planet. On the other hand Doug beer snobs aren't all that
bad. They
don't hold a candle to California Snobs who exist only because they
think a
't' is a 'b.'

"DSK" wrote in message
. ..
Scott Vernon wrote:
When I drank beer, back in my teens, I preferred Rolling Rock.

We already have enough beer snobs on this NG.

I like Rolling Rock. It's not in the running for Best Beer In The
World
but (as even Mooron acknowledged) a cold one on a hot day really
hits
the spot.

Beer snobbery is just plain dumb. There are much more important
things
to get snobby about. Besides, if I try to be a good host and stock
four
or five kinds of beer on the boat, and guests turn up their nose
at all
choices, then they can always drink water. Or tea.

Fresh Breezes- Doug

Speaking of oil, Scout, did you see any on the Del. from that spill?
How far up is it?

Scotty


"DSK" wrote in message
.. .
Scout wrote:
Thanks Seahag,
Don't listen to Scotty, he's just jealous! I made my own out of an
old 300
gallon oil tank.

How long did the 300 gallons of oil burn?

DSK

Capt. Neal® wrote:



Going to the west on a broad reach in both cases takes
one over to the weak side of both storms and as one
progress further and further from the path the winds
would back so they would end up in a direction so
one could then reach to close reach on the starboard
tack.

Perhaps this is what is confusing you. You apparently
are using the standard knowledge when one is already
caught in the strong circulation of a storm whereas I
don't wait that long and have more comfortable options.


You propose to cross the likely hurrican track?

Cheers

You need to look at a map of the Caribbean and the tracks of Frances
and Jeanne. People in Governor's Harbor, Eleuthera, for example
were right in the direct path of the storm.

If they sailed off on a close hauled tack in the NE winds they would
just stayed in the path of the hurricane and put themselves even
more in the dangerous quadrant if and when the storm started
to recurve.

People who were smart like me sailed off on a broad reach to the west
and not only got out of the path of the storm but put themselves
on the weaker side doing it plus putting themselves even farther away
if the storm decided to recurve.

The lesson - don't trust in conventional old sailing saws.

CN

"Nav" wrote in message ...


Capt. Neal® wrote:



Going to the west on a broad reach in both cases takes
one over to the weak side of both storms and as one
progress further and further from the path the winds
would back so they would end up in a direction so
one could then reach to close reach on the starboard
tack.

Perhaps this is what is confusing you. You apparently
are using the standard knowledge when one is already
caught in the strong circulation of a storm whereas I
don't wait that long and have more comfortable options.


You propose to cross the likely hurrican track?

Cheers

"Scott Vernon" wrote in message
...
If Starbucks is so bad, how come there's one on every corner? They
seem to be busy.

Are you under the impression that McDonald's serve the best beef?




Regards


Donal
--

You never sailed anywhere. You're full of ****.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Capt. Neal®" wrote in message
...

You need to look at a map of the Caribbean and the tracks of Frances
and Jeanne. People in Governor's Harbor, Eleuthera, for example
were right in the direct path of the storm.

If they sailed off on a close hauled tack in the NE winds they would
just stayed in the path of the hurricane and put themselves even
more in the dangerous quadrant if and when the storm started
to recurve.

People who were smart like me sailed off on a broad reach to the west
and not only got out of the path of the storm but put themselves
on the weaker side doing it plus putting themselves even farther away
if the storm decided to recurve.

The lesson - don't trust in conventional old sailing saws.

CN

"Nav" wrote in message
...


Capt. Neal® wrote:



Going to the west on a broad reach in both cases takes
one over to the weak side of both storms and as one
progress further and further from the path the winds
would back so they would end up in a direction so
one could then reach to close reach on the starboard
tack.

Perhaps this is what is confusing you. You apparently
are using the standard knowledge when one is already
caught in the strong circulation of a storm whereas I
don't wait that long and have more comfortable options.


You propose to cross the likely hurrican track?

Cheers

they serve beef?
gf.


"Donal" wrote in message
...

Are you under the impression that McDonald's serve the best beef?




Regards


Donal
--

starbucks is about the worst coffee i've ever tasted
it always tastes burnt and have been told they delibrately do this to
extract more caffiene
at $3.50 a cup, it is also the biggest rip off around.
gf.

"Donal" wrote in message
...

"Scott Vernon" wrote in message
...
If Starbucks is so bad, how come there's one on every corner? They
seem to be busy.

Are you under the impression that McDonald's serve the best beef?




Regards


Donal
--