I just made my own Bing Cherry Preserve recipe. Like you I made a smaller batch, used by weight 3/4 sugar to cherries, added juice of half a lemon and some vanilla bean. They turned out absolutely lovely. I have to say I never, ever add butter to preserves. I don't use it in pies either. For me it dulls the fruit flavor. I don't mind skimming the preserves like crazy if I have to. Carol

Wow, you really are twisted. Since you throw the COTS program out there, take a look at it yourself. It is the government exercising control and shifting the technological innovation to the private companies. Duh. Why? Because NASA couldn't cut it and now admits the private sector can do better if properly funded I see you've abandoned your line of argument that there are some sort of relevant "legal barriers" preventing private companies from launching their own spacecraft. Quite to the contrary, they've been trying since the inception of modern rocketry; their failures litter the landscape. Getting out of this gravity well is just incredibly difficult. Secondly, "the government" did not create COTS. COTS was the creation of NASA administrator Michael Griffin. Its origins date back to a 1990 *internal* NASA study called "Alt Access". And it's not because NASA "couldn't cut it". The whole point is to prop up private industry despite the fact that it has repeatedly not been able to "cut it", because if they can succeed in getting private craft to orbit, part of the development costs will be subsidized by the marketplace. I.e., NASA gets access for cheaper. But really, why are you dragging this conversation to this complete tangent? A silly attempt to try to discount NASA research via guilt-by-association? So what, on all of NASA's peer-reviewed papers, did they pay off the reviewers, too? How deep does this evil NASA conspiracy to promote LEDs go? You are obviously highly delusional if you see above where you linked over a dozen of anything. You link one I linked to a study showing the negative effects of yellow light on lettuce, the microgravity dwarf wheat experiments, and there are a ton of studies covered in the Helsinki paper which I didn't feel the need to re-link on my own but were mentioned in one of my links. Straight from the link you provided: "The purpose of the experiment was to study the effects of microgravity on the reproductive physiology of higher plants." Where is there a mention of it being about lighting? Just two lines later: "This research was designed to further evaluate the technology used to support food production by crews on long duration space flights" Is this Gardenweb School for the Blind or something? Many experienced gardeners that grows radishes knows you can grow radishes just as I said. Give me a break. Search for "sun" and "radish". Radishes grow optimally under two key conditions: cool and very sunny. Too hot and they bolt. Too little sun and they don't put on bulb mass. These are facts. Just so you know, my radishes (under the protection of peppers) have nice bulbs to them. You're still growing radishes in June? Mine are all full sized and out of the ground by May. You know, you might want to consider giving them more sunlight if you want to grow them faster. ;) Or is *your* goal to grow crops slowly? Well, if that's your standard, then by all means, my LED grow room is an abject failure! ;) So yippee, the study covered lettuce, too. Good to see that discovering your mistakes makes you happy. Judging from this thread, you'll probably live a very happy life. Lettuce is commonly grown the same way to extend it's season beyond late spring Like radishes, lettuce gets shaded to *slow it down* in the summer heat to stop it from bolting. This is really basic gardening here. or even to wheat Ha! That's really funny. Close-packed wheat pretty much defines a dense canopy. Peppers can't hold a candle to grains in terms of shading. Peppers even have a pretty spare canopy compared to lettuce and radishes. Come to think of it... I'm having trouble coming up with garden crops that have a *less* dense canopy than peppers generally do. Tomatoes? Nope. Eggplant? Maybe, but not usually. Mint? Nope. Etc. I suppose basil might be considered on-par with peppers. a university I have never heard of Oh! Well, that seals it right there! Everybody, Joe has never heard of Helsinki University of Technology; therefore, I'm wrong! FYI: Helsinki University of Technology is Finland's top tech college, and is one of the top 100 schools in the world for degrees in technology-related fields (according to QS's rankings of the world's universities.). TO THE ELECTRONICS DEPARTMENT Good point. After all, LEDs are handled by the Underwater Basketweaving Department. Do you expect us to follow every one of those sources the guy cites? If you care about peer review? Yeah, I do. The fact that you're basically saying "I haven't read it, but they must be wrong!" really shows how much you think of peer-reviewed scientific research. Exclamation points aren't indicative of hostility. They are exclamatory. Get a dictionary lady. "The act of exclaiming; outcry; loud complaint or protest: The speech was continually interrupted by rude exclamations." So, you were exclaiming, outcrying, offering loud complaint or protest... but in a kind, non-hostile manner, right? ;) Of course, you will interpret it to mean whatever you want or you will just settle on one definition that suits your argument, right? Nah, only Definition #1. From there, you hijacked this thread Hey, how's that "NASA sucks and here's why" tangent you dragged this into going? even you admit it became about LED's rather than about "My hot pepper situation" that simply mentions LED's You know, I recall the poster devoting a whole paragraph to asking about LED lights. I don't recall them asking about whether the Bush administration tried to pressure NASA scientists to deny global warming (which you brought up in a strange attempt to argue that if an organization does something wrong -- which, funny enough, they did just the opposite of what you insinuated -- then all research conducted by all groups associated with them becomes null and void, even when peer-reviewed.) Hmm, what's a tangent: discussing peer-reviewed research on LEDs when the original poster asked about LEDs, or smearing NASA? I'll have to think about this one.... ;) By the way: sorry for the sarcasm, but I really do find your posts amusing, so it's just coming out on its own. I get a kick out of the fact that you don't seem to realize that you're contradicting and damning yourself with every post.

You could do an image search in google for something like "transom windows victorian picture rail" or some version of that, and also search this forum for "mouldings" or "trim." You might find some pictures that will show some options. Also, you could consult a millwork shop if you have one locally that specializes in historic mouldings. I think a key issue is your ceiling height. Some things look good at a certain height, and otherwise they don't. Our ceilings are, I think, 10'4" in most rooms and all had a picture rail or wallpaper border at 1 foot below the ceiling. In all rooms we painted the top 12" to match the ceilings and it looks great - it takes away the sense that you are standing in a chimney (the rooms are small). In the kitchen, however, we stiffened the ceiling because the floor above was sagging, reducing ceiling height to exactly 10 feet. When we held up the border or whatever we had planned for the 1 foot drop, it looked wrong, so in that room, the wall colour goes right to the ceiling. The picture rail with 1 foot above it goes with wainscoting and a chair rail in one room. The other common treatment is panelling with a plate rail at about 5 feet, with paint above that, but my feeling is that is more often in rooms that are 9 feet tall. Don't quote me on that, but the point is, what looks right will depend in part on just how high your ceilings are. Crown moulding, I think, goes with lower ceilings still, or in the grander settings, in rooms that are wider than they are tall. And I'm not sure it ever combines with a picture rail. Your transom size might also matter - maybe your picture rail can line up or exactly bisect the transom. It's all about proportions... Karin L PS I love wallpaper, but the funny thing is that as hard as it is to strip, it's also fragile :-)

azzalea -- Maybe you could take a camera crew over to evatex's house and you'd both be happy. LOL Y'all probably don't really want to be on a talk show. The host doesn't want the audience to hear YOU, after all, SHE is the STAR. (ref. Oprah and all the 'hosts' on CNN who ask questions then continually interrupt cogent guests after one sentence. This leads to the guest who never answers a question, just trots out his prepared spiel.)