BS: Sigh

Subject: RE: BS: Sigh
From: akenaton
Date: 23 Aug 15 - 01:41 PM

Just one example of many.

Dave the Gnome
Date: 23 Aug 15 - 12:35 PM

You are forgiven, Al. To mis-quote someone being tortured to death, you know not what you did. :-) One thing I have noticed though, on this thread and the last, you don't need abuse or libel or incivility to close a thread. Just mention history and sure as eggs is eggs, closure will shortly follow. Wonder why?

Anyway, did I read somewhere back up the thread someone groundlessly accusing me of abuse? Never mind, I forgive them as well. Which answers someone else's question about what I would do if it happened to me. Everyone can see that I have not used any in either thread so it is obvious that the allegation is nonsense. Just as would any allegation of being a troll, wiping my bum with the wrong hand or drinking girly drinks.

Subject: RE: BS: Sigh
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 23 Aug 15 - 01:40 PM

Nah. You would be doomed to discuss historians for an eternity :- P

Subject: RE: BS: Sigh
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 23 Aug 15 - 01:27 PM

How's about pouring Baileys over vanilla ice cream which has a dollop of clotted cream on top when it's not even Christmas? Is that forgivable?

Subject: RE: BS: Sigh
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 23 Aug 15 - 12:53 PM

With no examples of trollish behaviour that is just another unsubstantiated allegation. Yet again, I forgive you. It is obviously nonsense and everyone can see it as such.

Subject: RE: BS: Sigh
From: akenaton
Date: 23 Aug 15 - 12:46 PM

No one accused you of abuse, I said you were a troll....which you obviously are.

Subject: RE: BS: Sigh
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 23 Aug 15 - 12:39 PM

Does no mean no-one made the accusation or that it was not groundless? It's not often a one word answer can be ambiguous but if anyone can do it, it will be on Mudcat! :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Sigh
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Aug 15 - 12:35 PM

Anyway, did I read somewhere back up the thread someone groundlessly accusing me of abuse?

No.

Subject: RE: BS: Sigh
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 23 Aug 15 - 12:35 PM

You are forgiven, Al. To mis-quote someone being tortured to death, you know not what you did. :-) One thing I have noticed though, on this thread and the last, you don't need abuse or libel or incivility to close a thread. Just mention history and sure as eggs is eggs, closure will shortly follow. Wonder why?

Anyway, did I read somewhere back up the thread someone groundlessly accusing me of abuse? Never mind, I forgive them as well. Which answers someone else's question about what I would do if it happened to me. Everyone can see that I have not used any in either thread so it is obvious that the allegation is nonsense. Just as would any allegation of being a troll, wiping my bum with the wrong hand or drinking girly drinks.

Talking of which, yes Steve, I enjoy a drop of the grape juice as well. Just relaxing with a small glass of rather too Rioja as we speak :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Sigh
From: DMcG
Date: 23 Aug 15 - 12:10 PM

Megan/Derrick: a really good example of that can be found by reading some histories of the Scandinavian countries. It is very common to come across (for a made up example) Olaf the Great on one side of the water and Olaf the Terror on the other, when they are one and the same Olaf. Viewpoint is crucial.

Subject: RE: BS: Sigh
From: akenaton
Date: 23 Aug 15 - 12:04 PM

I agree with Hilo, History can only be properly written when all available facts and sources have been examined.

An eye witness at the Battle of the Somme(like my grandfather) could never be in possession of such facts. He admired General Haig and had the intelligence never to take part in the 1930's revisionism.

"There was no option, it was sacrifice or defeat" he used to say.

Subject: RE: BS: Sigh
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 23 Aug 15 - 11:52 AM

Am I the only person round here who loves to pour neat limoncello over my sorbet?



OK, as soon as I find me coat... :-(

Subject: RE: BS: Sigh
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Aug 15 - 11:47 AM

Al, I am not being unfriendly, and I am sorry if I come across as that.

I'm not sure where your point of view comes from. are you?

It comes from reading history.
For the last twenty years at least, there has been agreement about those issues I posted about.

You are just shooting the messenger.

What you said about "original sources" from your course was correct, and I said at once that I agreed.

Subject: RE: BS: Sigh
From: GUEST,Derrick
Date: 23 Aug 15 - 11:44 AM

I agree Megan,little or nothing in this world is truly black or white it is usually a shade of grey with possibly a hint of another colour.
Your perspective of an event depends on where you are standing,someone in a different place sees it differently only by combining what each one sees can a reasonable agreement on what actually happened be arrived at.

Subject: RE: BS: Sigh
From: GUEST,Modette
Date: 23 Aug 15 - 11:43 AM

Can we please reject any truth in the oft-quoted 'history is written by the victors/winners' assertion?

Of course, some of it is, but much is also written by those who were 'defeated' or who were non-participants. The quote is also based upon the mistaken belief that all history is concerned with conflict of some kind when, quite clearly, it is not.

Subject: RE: BS: Sigh
From: GUEST,HiLo
Date: 23 Aug 15 - 11:11 AM

Primary sources are essential to historians. I know of no historian who does not consult them. However, eye witness accounts are sometimes not very helpful as a number of people describing the same event will see it very differently. Diaries, documents, maps, contemporary newspaper accounts, cartoons, letters and so on, are all primary sources and historians consult as many as possible.
As for "revisionist" history..it should be kept in mind that over the past number of years more and more documents have become available for study as have letters and diaries.
As a teacher of history I would not tell students that eyewitness accounts always trump historians..I would tell them to read and think critically, regardless of the source, that is objectivity. Historians are not neutral but they can be objective.
What I see a lot of here are people who are not historians misusing
history in order to support outdated views.
As to historians having "agendas", yes some do, but they are not highly respected by their peers. Good, historians, inform and enlighten us, read them and learn and enjoy.

Subject: RE: BS: Sigh
From: Musket
Date: 23 Aug 15 - 11:08 AM

Bollocks. They were all in agreement that the chicken crossed the road to ask Col Sanders for political asylum.

Rather releived to see Raedwulf thinking he disagrees with me. I would like to leave it at that but have sneaking feeling that if he understood my stance, he would be able to say whether he agrees or not, rather than the Keith style "I'll disagree with him anyway."

The Donkeys. Written by a historian, apparently. If he hadn't developed that brain tumour and snuffed it, he could have qualified to be on Keith's little list. 😂😂😂


Yeah Steve, usually manage to bag vineyard visits when on holiday, and spent our honeymoon searching California for the perfect Pinot. (Found it a couple of years later in South Africa but I digress.)

Snag is, the beer references seem to be by those of us at Whitby festival. Beer, basically. Getting in touch with my masculine side. A bit like my feminine side but could do with a shave.

Subject: RE: BS: Sigh
From: Rapparee
Date: 23 Aug 15 - 11:04 AM

Very good advice, Megan. I myself use the AP, UPI, CBC, CNN, BBC, Al Jazeera, Yonhap, Reuters, and others when I read the news online. Then, for wrapping fish entrails, I subscribe to the local paper.

Subject: RE: BS: Sigh
From: Megan L
Date: 23 Aug 15 - 10:57 AM

Think for a moment of the question "Why did the chicken cross the road?" There were two men who witnessed the event. One man on each side of the road.

Now on the side the chicken left from the pavement (kerb)dipped down a little to a garden hedge. The man on that side stated emphatically "the chicken crossed the road to escape from a cat that was coming through the hedge."

On the other side of the street a farmer had been carrying a sack of grain with a small hole in it had stopped for a while to talk to a friend. The witness on this side of the road stated equally emphatically. "The chicken crossed the road to eat the grain.

Each statement may have contained an element of the truth, while a third person may have been able to say that the hen house was on the side with the grain.

Nigel Tranter (writer of many novels based on historical characters) once told my brother when looking at history always read accounts from at least three views,the truth will lie somewhere in the middle.

Subject: RE: BS: Sigh
From: Greg F.
Date: 23 Aug 15 - 10:55 AM

Jaysus, not another extended concert by Kieth And The Living Hack Historians!!

Some folks never learn to let sleeping clowns lie......

Subject: RE: BS: Sigh
From: Rapparee
Date: 23 Aug 15 - 10:53 AM

I just returned, less than a week ago, from a very nice journey in Alsace, Bavaria, and the Black Forest. In Alsace there was a family reunion of my wife's family, and the Alsatians couldn't have been nicer. I drank a lot of beer and wine and, yes, schnapps. I didn't find a bad lot in the lot.

There was one pils in Bavaria of which I found the taste a bit weak, but even that was better than Coors or Budweiser (what isn't?).

But someone mentioned Talisker. I do hope that you crossed yourself and made obeisance when you wrote that holy name!

As for historians, remember that the victors write the histories. I find John Keegan's "Face of Battle" to be a superior work in its field, but even following the research he put into it we don't know the experiences of the average member of the PBI on either side. Even those Brits who served in Malay or the Yanks in Korea (and even Vietnam) are getting thin on the ground. And many, if not most, don't want to talk about what they really experienced with those who weren't there. I know; I'm one of them, and it's simply not possible to convey the experience so that it is truly understood.

But history can teach us what to do and, perhaps more importantly, what not to do. That is, if we have a balanced account and we understand it and we actually put its lessons into practice. Otherwise we are the French Army in 1914, resplendent in straight red and blue lines, charging the machine guns of the army in feldgrau, or either side the in US Civil War charging uphill again massed unit fire and artillery. As the man said, "Gallant, but it's not war."

And these examples, taken from the histories of war, apply in many other areas. The US ignored the fact that the Cuban embargo simply didn't work for more than a half a century. Britain had its Cromwellian clearances and then the ones in Scotland and Acadia. I shan't even go into the abuses by industries!

Enough of this! Musket, I'm glad that you've visited my neck of the woods. I gave up downhill quite a while back when the lift lines got too long and the skiers/snowboarders become to dangerous to others. Next time you're around here let me know and I'll set you up at Pebble, one of the best little-known areas in the West. Or, you can stay at my place and do cross-country on the golf course out back or use Mink Creek.

Subject: RE: BS: Sigh
From: Raedwulf
Date: 23 Aug 15 - 10:31 AM

Primary source does not equal "good history", any more then secondary source equals "bad history". All primary source means is "eye-witness". It doesn't mean that Al's granddad had more knowledge, a more valid opinion, an unbiased opinion; it just means that he was part of it when it was happening. Make your own judgements about whether being close to events makes for an accurate assessment of what actually happened.

As for "false revisionist pro establishment view of WW1", I find myself on the opposite side to Musket again (great-great-granddad was German, Musket, if you want to put me in the pickelhaube! ;-) ). I've been interested in WWI for 30+ years. Yes, my granddad fought, he was wounded twice, the second time in both shoulders. In fact, the first time (if memory serves) was about a week after he was sent to France. Nice going. But he died when I was 3, so no, I've never spoken to a primary source & I never will.

The generals, in all armies, were neither blameless professionals nor butchers & bunglers. They fought a war that had never really been fought before (the ACW & the Franco-Prussian, the only big industrialised wars, were not on the same scale), without the experience or the knowledge to do so, in an age when everyone at every level of society was, well, an amateur. Time & motion, professionalism & all that jazz hadn't really been thought about.

Most importantly, they had to command vast armies without the communications necessary to understand what was happening or to be able to control them in any reasonable time-scale. No radio communication for a start.

The likes of Montgomery, Rommel, Eisenhower, etc got their "on the job" training in WWI. WWII would have been, well, WWI without WWI! If it's "revisionist" to suggest that, whatever the job they did, the likes of Haig, Foch, Hindenburg, et al did the best they could in the circumstances, then I'm a revisionist. False? No, I don't think so. I've read the apologists like Terraine & Corrigan, I've read the "Butchers & bunglers" (MacDonald, Horne, and too many to mention, since it was a popular tack through the 50's, 60's, and 70's). I've even read the liars, such as Alan Clark. The "truth", insofar as there can be a truth, lies somewhere between.

I do think that more distance & less "eye-witness" emotion has allowed more recent historians to make a better assessment of what really happened. You can read A.G.Lee, you can read V.M.Yeates. They were both accredited fighter aces in WWI. They have fairly opposite points of view. I don't know that their involvement makes them better historians than F.J.Bloggs, born 50 years afterwards!

Subject: RE: BS: Sigh
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 23 Aug 15 - 10:17 AM

my posting on this thread was actually intended as an olive branch to you Keith. Just suggesting that maybe there is a valid reason why we all disagree with you, so often.

But you really are in a tear arsed hurry to piss everyone off. I don't understand you, at all. You've not engaged with anything I've said, you've just dismissed it out of hand as untrue and unworthy, when I have explained that the point of view i arrived at was a result of my Open University Education and my family background.

I'm not sure where your point of view comes from. are you? I think you should maybe think seriously. Is it a general anti-social desire to hurt?

I'm sure there are ideas out there that could cut to the heart of a right winger. But are you really right wing? Do you really revere the word of these historians? or do you just like the idea of cutting?

Subject: RE: BS: Sigh
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 23 Aug 15 - 09:57 AM

Am I the only person around here who makes Bellinis?


I'll get me coat.... :-(

Subject: RE: BS: Sigh
From: Bill D
Date: 23 Aug 15 - 09:56 AM

Many historians use whatever suits the winner to write history... I could give a dozen examples of distortions of history by those who want only one viewpoint expressed.

This is exacerbated when no one can even agree on which sources ARE primary.

Subject: RE: BS: Sigh
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Aug 15 - 09:38 AM

.pity the truth uttered by a primary source evades your comprehension!

It does not, and historians use primary resources to write history.

Subject: RE: BS: Sigh
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 23 Aug 15 - 09:29 AM

okay luv! but take it from me, your mainstream has flowed in the wrong direction. and no one asked my My dad or my Grandad their view of the relief of Ladysmith or Villers bocage.

they would certainly have mentioned it.

In fact we were on holiday on year when my Mum spent and enormous amount, seven quid! for an account of the campaign of the Guards Armoured Division's Normandy campaign - she thought it would be a treat!

he said it was bollocks from start to end. very dry, whereas the experience itself was anything but... filled with incident, in fact!
If you weren't there you could never understand. Many years later I was teaching with a guy who was in the same campaign. he said HE knew exactly what my father meant. ..pity the truth uttered by a primary source evades your comprehension!

ps I do not regard myself as a left winger. only a little left of moderates like Pol Pot. but I think its you that brings that side out in me.

Subject: RE: BS: Sigh
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Aug 15 - 09:14 AM

Musket, Hastings was just one of many historians I referenced.
Other historians call him an historian too, and BBC puts him at the top of their list of "ten leading historians of WW1"
All of you could find nothing written in the last twenty years opposing my views.

Al,
and as far as i know - no historian solicited their views.

They have.
It is their job.

perhaps that is a simple explanation of why Keith is so much and so often at variance with the rest of us.

My views are mainstream.
By "us" you mean a very left wing group of Mudcatters.
Your views are worth every bit as much as mine, but hardly mainstream.

Subject: RE: BS: Sigh
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 23 Aug 15 - 07:14 AM

no but that really is the main bone of contention between Keith and the rest of us when you think about it. i had a grandad who fought in the Boer War and the first world war. and to be honest , i grew up surrounded by tales of how the soldiers were fighting on two fronts - the enemy and the insane bloody orders. and to honest - they were backed up by the fragments uttered by my dad who fought under Montgomery round Caen.

these were primary sources by blokes who were there. and as far as i know - no historian solicited their views.

on our course, we studied industrialisation, and we were urged to talk to people who had worked in the victorian factories, many of which were still in operation. weigh it with contemporary accounts, rather than accept analyses.

maybe thinking has changed. perhaps society has changed so much that   people cannot really access first hand accounts of history as easily as our generation. My gandmothers sister was born in the 1850's. i knew her as a very small boy. now there is someone who could have known the survivors of Waterloo. this is no longer possible of course.

perhaps that is a simple explanation of why Keith is so much and so often at variance with the rest of us.

thinking about the study of history has perhaps changed. nowadays we are at the mercy of historians and their interpretations of the facts.

he takes a keen interest. whereas we have our vivid memories of people who lived hard and were much put upon.

Subject: RE: BS: Sigh
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 23 Aug 15 - 07:09 AM

Does anybody round here apart from me drink wine?


OK, I'll get me coat... :-(

Subject: RE: BS: Sigh
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 23 Aug 15 - 07:05 AM

Is this a good time to reiterate that some historians should be ashamed of themselves, promoting a false revisionist pro establishment view of WW1?

Thought not.

Max Hastings, I can understand. Only Keith and his mate Michael Gove ever saw him as a historian, whilst as a hack, his output has always been sensational and geared towards selling copy through controversy. It is sad that some more academic second hand account merchants jumped on the "can I have a knighthood too?" bandwagon.

You see Keith, you are pointing out something that you think is wrong and hoping everybody thinks I am stupid but unfortunately for you, I stand by it and a hell of a lot of others seem to agree with the stance, including some (gosh😳) historians.

Oh, and Baldrick. Boom Boom Boom Boom thick Boom Boom Boom etc Boom Boom


Welbeck Henrietta. Cracking ale. My head was certainly cracking this morning, although I was mixing it a bit..

Subject: RE: BS: Sigh
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 23 Aug 15 - 06:59 AM

I haven't tasted or smelled any magma lately, at least not since I was up Mount Etna in June, but I'm inordinately fond of the lava of the Cuillins, aka Talisker. Sorry to drift the thread away from beer. A temporary distraction only. :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Sigh
From: GUEST
Date: 23 Aug 15 - 06:41 AM

Don't be alarmed Al, it takes very little to rattle some cages.

Subject: RE: BS: Sigh
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 23 Aug 15 - 06:36 AM

actually Dave its me who owes you an apology. things were going okay until i made a very genuine query as to whether thinking about sources of historical knowledge had changed since i took my open university degree, some forty years ago.

i didn't mean to set the cat amongst the pigeons.

i'm sorry. mea culpa. mea maxima culpa.

Subject: RE: BS: Sigh
From: Raggytash
Date: 23 Aug 15 - 06:17 AM

We were not on pints Backwoodsman.

I didn't see any Magma there. In fact I don't think the Troubadour Brewery had any of their beers there.

Subject: RE: BS: Sigh
From: akenaton
Date: 23 Aug 15 - 06:12 AM

Oh for god's sake stop digging Raggytash, I can smell the magma.

Subject: RE: BS: Sigh
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 23 Aug 15 - 06:11 AM

Bloody hell, Raggy, how are you managing to type coherently through the haze of alcohol? You must be pissed out of your brains by now! 👍😄

Subject: RE: BS: Sigh
From: Raggytash
Date: 23 Aug 15 - 06:07 AM

Moving on we also sampled Humpty Dumpty (Reedham) Reedham Gold 3.6% then a Kelburn (Glasgow)Jaguar at 4.5%

Subject: RE: BS: Sigh
From: akenaton
Date: 23 Aug 15 - 05:59 AM

Nice bit of observation I would say!

Subject: RE: BS: Sigh
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 23 Aug 15 - 05:18 AM

In a single post a fellow bemoans foul, groundless abuse then accuses those he disagrees with, completely groundlessly, of posting under the influence of drink. Nice piece of rank hypocrisy there, I'd say.

The Hop Back brewery makes Summer Lightning, a very nice bottle-conditioned beer. I have a vague feeling that the chap who developed that brew also had a hand in developing some of Dartmoor Brewery's excellent beers. A few years ago I had a memorable night out at that brewery, then at the Plume of Feathers in Princetown, with a bunch of musicians on a "educational visit". :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Sigh
From: GUEST,Raggytash
Date: 23 Aug 15 - 04:48 AM

Now where were we. Oh yes I'd mentioned Elgoods that was disappointing, they used to brew a brown ale that was superb back when I was a lad.

The next was Forge Brewery (Bideford)Hartland Blonde at 4/0% Then Hobsons (Cleobury Mortimer)Old Prickly at 4.2% then we tried a Hop Back (Salisbury) Citra at 4.0%

Subject: RE: BS: Sigh
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Aug 15 - 04:45 AM

So Dave, (sigh) you will revert to insult and abuse of those you disagree with, in company no doubt with Greg, Raggy, Musket and Jim.
(Sigh)
Along with the rest of Mudcat, I will continue to eschew such behaviour, relying instead on knowledge based discussion.
Because I can Dave.

Musket, I gave a link so that your quote could be seen in its intended, hilarious context.

Subject: RE: BS: Sigh
From: akenaton
Date: 23 Aug 15 - 04:39 AM

See what I mean?....that is the sort of thing the closed thread should have been addressing, foul, groundless abuse.

My remarks earlier had no reflection on the quality of beer, I no longer drink alcohol but have sunk a few pints of Youngers Heavy in my day. The owner of old family firm of Wm Younger and Son, was a friend and customer of mine, he explained the art of brewing to me.
Mr Younger unfortunately died recently....Their "logo" was an old gentleman with a white beard and stick....."Father William".

Regarding the closed thread, I take Mr McGrath's point, but beer was introduced to the discussion fairly early on and at regular intervals thereafter.....usually when the "aficionados" were getting the worst of the debate, run out of answers, or simply necked one bottle too many!.....    :0)

Subject: RE: BS: Sigh
From: Musket
Date: 23 Aug 15 - 03:48 AM

Sadly mate, I need to be back at home by tea time. Just going to a lunch time session c/w with fizzy pop or coffee then hit the road.

Nice thought.

On other matters, I notice there has been a thread, now closed called irony. It's a pity it's closed, it either needs opening or fully deleting as Keith started it to take a comment by me out of context yet it was closed before I could reply. It would be like this one being closed before Keith could refute a claim that he lost his teaching job after being caught sniffing girls' bike saddles.

Same thing really.

Subject: RE: BS: Sigh
From: GUEST,Raggytash
Date: 23 Aug 15 - 03:30 AM

Musket, a group of us are catching a train from Whitby to Glaisdale to escape the day tourists today at 13.03. If you join us you'll find me ....... the guy with a raggy tash

Subject: RE: BS: Sigh
From: Musket
Date: 23 Aug 15 - 03:25 AM

Fair point Rapparee. I have had moose drool many times in The Mangy Moose when skiing at Jackson Hole. It does give me a thick head, but drinking at 7,000' may have something to do with it.

In fact, about ten years ago, I found myself on stage jamming with The Clumsy Lovers. Good night, what I recall of it.

Anyway, not a bad morning here at Whitby. Going for a nice walk shortly round the harbour and up the hill to get some smoked fish to take home tonight. The hotel has offered to keep it in their fridges for me till I drive home. Nice of them.

Wish you were here,

Luv & hugs

Musket.

Subject: RE: BS: Sigh
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 23 Aug 15 - 03:20 AM

Glad you noticed, Kevin :-) I suspect most people did but unnamed Guest of 22 Aug 15 - 07:11 PM either did not realise or chose to ignore the pun anyway.

As to The thread was started by a troll who could not answer the points put to him.

Thank you for giving us the perfect example of the type of behavior that got the thread closed.

I am not sure I agree with you on Ciders, Steve. I had some very nice still ciders at Moria last weekend but, in the main, the ones generally available are not good. I vary with my beers. There are times I like nothing better than some traditional ales, preferable dark. Other times I enjoy blondes or many of the fine continental lagers - Usually Belgian or Czech but a couple of the Polish ones are very pleasant. The local 'craft beer' shops (where did that expression come from?) do have a good range of all sorts of beers, including American ones. I enjoy most in the right circumstances :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Sigh
From: Ed T
Date: 22 Aug 15 - 11:27 PM

"a very entertaining, sexually wrought, wistful romp throughout the beaches and streets of Marseille"

Subject: RE: BS: Sigh
From: Bill D
Date: 22 Aug 15 - 10:34 PM

I have had Sam Smith's ale... and Riggwelter and a few dozen more from the UK..(even from Wales) and some were truly delights.... but I can buy, 5 minutes from my house, a couple of dozen American beers & ales that compare favorably with almost any in the world..(. except several Trappist ales from Belgium.).. which are also available 5 min. away... when I can afford them.

I have tried, since 1977 when I moved east from Kansas where Coors was considered high class, perhaps 800-1000 different beers/ales... some wonderful and some not fit for pouring on a burning copy of Rise Up Singing..(but who'd want to?)

I just had a bottle of 8-Point IPA, and will happily have more soon. We gots us some real good stuff 'round these parts now....

Subject: RE: BS: Sigh
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 22 Aug 15 - 09:39 PM

Cider has alcohol in it. Its merits stop right there. Moving swiftly on. I was in the real Sierra Nevada two weeks ago, the one in Andalucia. it is an area not noted for its amazing beers, though I must say that, at 104F, a couple of bottles of icy-cold Cruz Campo work wonders. Sacrilege, I know. But one does have to survive.

Subject: RE: BS: Sigh
From: Rapparee
Date: 22 Aug 15 - 09:27 PM

Earlier this year the Brewers Association reported that there were 3,464 breweries of all sizes operating in the US. Of course, "good beer" depends upon your taste. Beers are both bottle and cask conditioned (and otherwise, but I shan't mention those). I shall NOT drink "light" or "lite" beer, those horrific parodies of what's good.

Oh, yes, cider is being consumed more in the US. It's one of the fastest growing beverage consumption areas.