Interesting Links for 14-05-2013

[andrewducker]

• Engineering the $325,000 In-Vitro Burger
  (tags: thefuture technology food )
• Childcare in the UK: the tightest and most expensive?
  (tags: childcare uk )
• There are no alpha-wolves in the wild.
  (tags: behaviour wolves )
• Wine tasting is bullshit. Here's why.
  (tags: wine alcohol )
• Tom Baker vs Ray Harryhausen: Drink!
  (tags: tombaker alcohol )

Comments

[bart_calendar]

Angelina Jolie is really heading toward secular sainthood.

[daveon]

My other half had the same test about a year ago but it was negative but we know another person who did the same thing.

My wife's reaction was how annoyed she was at not getting new tits...

[artkouros]

It's probably just a coincidence that your Sheerwind post appears on my page just above my Dictionary Word of the Day:

quacksalver: a charlatan

[andrewducker]

I'm sceptical - in much the same way I'm sceptical of anything which isn't actually in solid production and tested by third parties yet.

(If every report I'd seen on improving solar power efficiencies had come to pass then I'd be able to paint them on to my t-shirt and fly to the moon.)

[danieldwilliam]

But not to the dark side of the moon.

[danieldwilliam]

Yeah - when I see it working and I see the order book then I’ll believe, or better yet, then I’ll know it works.

I’m pleased with the low cut in speed. That seems like a useful attribute.

[nancylebov]

I've never been into wine, though it does seem to me that some have more complex flavors than others.

I still believe I can taste the difference between at least some dark chocolates.

[ashfae]

I can absolutely taste the difference between dark chocolates.

[alitheapipkin]

Me too.

[philmophlegm]

Me three.

As for wine and wine critics, well I don't touch the stuff, but one of my best friends is a director of the Wines and Spirits Education Trust and an MW (Master of Wine). Whisky isn't his specialism (wine is, especially saki), but we once tried a single malt blind taste test. He identified both the distillery and the age. (And that's without us actually giving him a list to choose from.) I'm convinced that his palate is that good.

It may well be that there are wine critics out there talking bollocks (in fact I've never heard my friend talk in the bollockese that wine critics always do on the telly), but I'm pretty sure he's not one of them.

[ashfae]

Thanks for that childcare link; Relevent To My Interests, needless to say.

[daveon]

The wine thing, I am dubious about as anything other than a whine (sorry).

I can usually tell the difference between some of the major grapes too, and spot when there are certain grapes in a mix.

Some people don't taste the differences, but then some people don't taste anything different about different types of beer either, so I suspect it's a mixture of personal taste and interest.

I do agree that price doesn't necessarily indicate quality, but there is a lower limit on that, below which you're drinking something that's probably just nasty.

I've also noticed that some blends just don't work. My favourite local winery makes some amazing blends, whereas some of their competitors take essentially the same ingredients and make something horrible out of them.

[naath]

Personally I think almost all beer tastes nasty; I can't get past the nasty "beer" taste to taste the particular flavourings that make *this* beer different to *that* beer (unless it is a fruit beer; in which case it doesn't taste "of beer" and is nice and I can tell which fruit it is).

I guess some people are the same with wine - that they can't get beyond the nasty "wine" taste. I've never believed the bollocks that wine reviewers come up with; but any "professional wine taster" who couldn't tell a Sauternes from a Chardonnay clearly needs the sack.

[daveon]

I like beer and wine and scotch and... anyway...

It must come down to individuals. I don't like Ardbeg much, but many of my scotch afficienado friends think it's the best.

While a lot of the 'I taste chocolate and elderflowers' stuff seems to be nuts, as you say, if you can't actually tell the difference between some of the major groups then you probably have the same problems with an Orange and a Banana.

[marrog]

I do agree that price doesn't necessarily indicate quality, but there is a lower limit on that, below which you're drinking something that's probably just nasty.

This is basically what I clicked through to say. I like the article in principle as it shows up that wine critics are clearly pompous asses, but I know what wines I like and what wines I don't, and there is definitely a level below which a wine is objectively terrible and gives you an insta-headache.

I don't have the palate daveon here does - Hardy's Crest (not stamp or varietal range, let's be clear, one must have standards!) on half price is about the height of my excitement for wine. But yeah, once you get above 'vinegar' the difference between 'not shit' and 'very nice' is usually a bit of a crap-shoot that has very little to do with price and everything to do with taste and luck