Entry tags:
KitKat
Last night I joined the select band of people who have enjoyed the exquisite pleasures of a waferless Kit-Kat. Don’t get me wrong—if they brought out an official waferless Kit-Kat tomorrow no-one would be the slightest bit excited. It’s not that good. It’s only the rarity, the almost forbidden-fruit quality, and the puzzling questions it briefly raises about how Kit-Kats are made in the first place that give them their star quality, although I also choose to believe it means I’ll now have seven years’ good luck. But raise those questions it did, and, some brief research later, I had had them answered: Kit-Kat wafers are fired at enormous velocity into huge vehicle-mounted vertical panels of chocolate. It’s no surprise, therefore, that sometimes a wafer will miss.


It also turns out that, intent on not being outdone by Nestlé, Mars Inc. spent the 1980s concentrating on research and development, with impressive results:
  

Schrodinger's KitKat
no subject
EH?
My tentative conclusion is that each Malteser is individually polished by gnomes.
[1] as we all know: this is impossible. We have all had a Malteser at some point which was incompletely covered with chocolate and yet whose honeycomb centre was in no way affected. Contact with water would cause instant core meltdown.
no subject
Not the Archimedean Screw bit (although: nice thinking). I mean I knew the gnomes smoked, the little bastards.
no subject
no subject
It's just the cigarettes, I swear. I don't have a thing for chocolatey gnomes.
no subject
Revels on the other hand are made by trained Palestinian rock throwers, who launch handfuls of assorted fondant centres through a chocolate waterfall.
no subject
Like the icon - I trust there will be an accompanying "TART" one?
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
(Anonymous) 2006-03-15 03:03 pm (UTC)(link)no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject