So…what you are really trying to say in your second attempt at an answer to this question, Cecil, is that your first answer was wrrr…that it was mista… that you made an er… that, well you and the correct answer were not, perhaps, entirely familiar with one another? Right? C’mon, you can just come out and say it can’t you?
Princhester.
Are you referring to Are green potato chips poisonous?
If so, you should include a link.
I think Cecil has nothing to apologize for, either in his original article, nor in his follow up reply to additional info.
He said in his original,
Notice that he doesn’t flat-out say that they are harmless. He couches it in terms that allow for further evidence.
Then, when the scientific type guy writes
Cecil answered with
It might be interesting if some medical-type person could reply with current, state-of-the-art info on whether the process that makes potato chips in any way alters the bad properties of the alkyloids that evidently exist in the green parts of potatos.
I’ve heard in passing about how the green under the skin of a potato is not supposed to be good for infants. But, IMHO, the green parts of a potato chip are not a direct cause of tummy aches.
Again, I’d love to see some results of research articles.
Sorry about not including a link. I copied the URL and then forgot to include the damn thing in my post.
Firstly, Samclem, saying “not harmless” and then saying “OK maybe what I should have said is not harmless compared to being hit by a truck” is pretty much either admitting you’re wrong or doing a weasel. But that isn’t really what I was on about.
Primarily what I was thinking of when I wrote my OP was the bit where Cecil says “Green (or brown) chips come from potatoes that have been kept in storage so long that the sugar in them has caramelized”. He then completely contradicts that in his second attempt and says “green potatoes result from excessive exposure to light, whether natural or artificial”.
He describes this as “clarifying” but let’s face it, that ain’t clarifying, that’s correcting an incorrect first attempt, any way you look at it.
He’s correcting himself and then clarifying what the USDA guy said. Green is from exposure to sunlight, not from caramelization; brown is from the accumulation of excessive sugar, not true caramelization.
How is that weaseling?
Read my post more carefully and you may save yourself from being , cityboy916
Fair enough, although I could point out that you said “OK maybe what I should have said is not harmless compared to being hit by a truck” and Cecil said “Maybe I should have said they were ‘harmless compared to getting hit by a truck,’” [coloring mine] but I digress.
I don’t know why he at first attributed the greenness to caramelization. It makes much more sense for chlorophyll to be responsible for one color than for caramelization to account for both colors, especially when the one in question is green. Hence the update, which supersedes the original article anyway.
Quite. So why are you confused?
I would use the term “update” for a second answer that used new (previously unavailable) information.
I would use the word “clarify” in relation to a second answer that improved the understandability of an earlier but basically correct answer.
I would use use the word “wrong” to describe Cecil’s first answer about the reason the chips are green.
As appears to be the case here. Technically, he does not call it an “update” but rather an “OOPS”.
He is clarifying what the USDA representative said. I agree that sentence could have been worded differently, but from the context it’s clear what he meant to say.
I would cut the guy a break, since he’s been doing this for over 30 years. Across that kind of timespan, nobody is immune to the occasional slip-up. I too question the reason why the first answer wasn’t researched as thoroughly as the update (continuation, response, second half of the article, whatever) but in all fairness, he did admit his “OOPS” and add information which we can be sure is correct.
I must admit I missed the OOPS.
However, the point remains that “clarifying” (which is the term Cecil uses) was an inappropriate word.
And I do give people a break when they don’t adopt the know-it-all attitude Cecil does. It’s all part of the game. I know perfectly well that Cecil is never wrong. It’s just fun to give him heaps when he gives an answer that is somewhat less than entirely co-incident with reality.