- cross-posted to:
- whiskey@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- whiskey@lemmy.world
Late last year, a hidden trove of whisky was discovered in a cellar room deep within a 13th century Scottish castle. The liquid was subsequently tested and determined to have been distilled back in 1833, making it the oldest known scotch in existence. Now two dozen bottles of it are going under the hammer in a November auction.
You must log in or register to comment.
Can’t wait for the worlds worst person to buy it
Hey it’s your boy tik-tok Keith I just brought this Whiskey, and we’re going to pour it down the sink
X Whiskey incoming
I don’t have the money for it.
Scotch 1/4 as old as me costs $50. Scotch nearly half as old as me costs $250. Scotch as old as me costs $35k. Following that progression to four times as old as me suggests those bottles will command a sum that could change the course of human history by eliminating hunger or curing diseases or colonizing Mars.
Reminder thay humanity has the power to end global hunger with both food resources and excess money to transport it.
We just choose not too because it’s “too hard” and “too expensive”
Just don’t ask who we, as humanity, owe the money to because you won’t like the answer. It certainly isn’t some galactic bank telling us we don’t qualify for a loan…
Under capitalism, food isn’t produced to eat but to make profits. When it’s not profitable to sell, they will rather dump foods, starving the people rather than to plainly donate. We produce enough foods to feed the entire population. But the sole purpose of food is to not feed the people, but to feed the greed of the producers, the farmers, the corporates. Capitalism created an artificial scarcity of food where we produce too much food for the obese and throw the rest away to rot in front of the poor.
It’s just a transfer of money, not expenditure of resources. The money doesn’t disappear when whoever owns the scotch gets it. Wasting natural resources and labor is much different and worse.
This is only an 8 year Scotch though.
My mistake. I skimmed it and got excited and thought they found forgotten casks, not already bottled Scotch. Since it’s not a known label, I’m not sure collectors will care all that much. And it’s probably not going to drink all that well as 8 years is on the younger side for Scotch. Depending on how well it was bottled, it might not be drinkable at all.
I’m sure someone will pay for the novelty, but this is way less exciting than I thought.
‘prolly goes great with diet coke’ - elon
prollyDefinitely goes great with diet coke.FIFY, never forget his empty self confidence.
Bloke in the thumbnail looks like he actually bored the label off that bottle
Honestly, there’s potential for a new meme template here
That’s just Ron Weasley after his Jay Leno poly juice potion started losing effect.
Reminds me of a movie, ‘The Freshman’ with Marlon Brando and Matthew Broderick. The Mafia tells people that they can eat endangered animals for $10,000.00 a plate. Naturally, there’s a line of decadent yuppies a mile long waiting to get into the secret restaurant. [Spoiler] it’s all goat meat, because who has ever tasted what real rhino tastes like?
I’ve been trying to think of the name of this movie. Thank you.
As we see with our politicians: aging doesn’t necessarily make things better.
$3.50. Final offer.
$4.20, and I’m willing to go down, way down.
It honestly blows my mind that the oldest whiskey on the planet is only from 1833. I dint know why but it feels like there should be more and older.
What can I say, humanity likes to party. All the booze is gone.
I’m kinda glad because it means it got drunk. I hate seeing good whisky/ey sit on a shelf.
Old wine turns to vinegar that’s why the words look similar. All alcohol eventually turns.
Is old better?
The longer a whisky is aged, typically it is more expensive. However, aging only happens inside the wooden barrel. The whisky develops more flavours due to interaction with the wooden cask. There is diminishing returns to ageing the whisky longer.
This isn’t what’s happened here. The whisky was stored in bottles. These bottles shouldn’t cause any ageing. However, these two ideas can be conflicted.
The value of this whisky is a taste of the past. A way to physically experience some history. People with an idea that things were better in the past may want to believe this was a better whisky.
I would guess this isn’t going to taste better. Improvements in manufacturing, quality control and knowledge of whisky probably make a better whisky today. Any high end whisky is going to be better. However, these same processes make low end whisky cheaper and probably worse.
If sealed properly the flavour of whiskey is extremely resilient so I think you are spot on about it being a way to experience whiskey history.
I would absolutely love to taste some of this stuff…the idea of tasting something from back then is very exciting.
I also expect you are correct in that wouldn’t taste as good as a modern whiskey.
If you really want to taste something historical, go to Egypt. Ancient Egyptian honey is routinely found in tombs and is still edible.
Difference between whiskey history and honey history is human input. Honey sorta happens without people. Whiskey does not. Millenia old honey, while neat, is still just honey. century old whiskey however contains all the choices the distiller made. It’s almost certainly not made to a strict recipe, and it likely used ingredients we wouldn’t today. Theres a lot to experience that has changed in distilling since it was distilled. Less so with honey.
Not knocking honey btw. Best honey I’ve ever had came from a backyard in Austin. I do recognize honey isn’t created equally. Just that time doesn’t really change what the bees have available so much.
Do they have middle aged women standing outside the pyramids handing out lil bitty spoons of honey samples? (I always go “mmmm…wow…I’m DEFINITELY going to get some of these now! Can I have one more?”)
“Just go to Egypt, brah.”
So, lighter fluid, it tastes like lighter fluid.
I’m just going to chime in and say all alcohol tastes like shit and I think very little of anyone who thinks otherwise.
They’re fooling themselves and buying into marketing, more often than not.
If by marketing you mean the buzz I get from one drink, then yeah.
Different folks have different tastes. I basically like things that physically hurt my mouth: Captain crunch, salt and vinegar kettle chips, ghost peppers, warheads, Laphroaig neat, espresso.
Some folks would rather have chicken nuggets and chocolate milk and that is Ok.
I’m just going to chime in and say all alcohol tastes like shit and I think very little of anyone who thinks otherwise.
They’re fooling themselves and buying into marketing, more often than not.
I think you need to experience more of the world.
I think cilantro is AWFUL and tastes like stinkbugs smell, but I don’t think people who like it are “fooling themselves and buying into marketing.”
People are different and they like different things.
Alcohol is different than cilantro.
Try not to resort to analogies, because then we have to discuss the merits of the analogy instead of the situation at hand.
I think cilantro is AWFUL and tastes like stinkbugs smell, but I don’t think people who like it are “fooling themselves and buying into marketing.”
You can say the same thing about literal shit. Which is why we don’t use analogies.
Alcohol is different than cilantro.
I’m not sure it is, actually.
Cilantro is simply a case where we have isolated the genetic difference. Taste and smell are enormously complicated, and there is evidence that other differences in taste are based in genetics as well.
For example, some people really enjoy a bitter IPA, but I cannot stand them. There have been some studies that have shown a potential link between genetics and a rejection of the strong hoppy flavors found in those types of beer. Which explains why my brothers-in-law love them but I cannot get through a single one, while I really enjoy other beers.
This should not be surprising. Smell involves an enormous number of proteins our genes code for to recognize chemicals. Some people recognize ones that others will not.
Perhaps there is something in your genetics that makes alcohol more abhorrent than it does for others.
All that said, there is something to be said about “acquiring” a taste. Which is to say, learning to appreciate what is good about something. Learning to taste whiskey is initially about taking very small sips to learn what flavors to look for without being overpowered by the ethanol. You don’t really drink scotch unless you’re very familiar with it, but even then a good scotch is more about sipping and appreciating the flavors.
This doesn’t only apply to literal taste. Music appreciation is largely about acquiring taste by learning what is good about it. Genres you are unfamiliar with will often not sound good to you, and music you think is incredible and unimpeachable might be called garbage by someone who is unfamiliar with the genre. Most genres have things to listen for to enjoy them, and unless you learn to like them you won’t.
And that’s okay! Not everyone needs to like the same things. But what we need to recognize is that other people are not wrong for having different tastes. They’re just different. Whether that difference is based in experience or genetics or any other factor, it’s not bad.
I don’t want to agree with you, but I do. I feel the same about coffee.
Many highly marketed drinks are just slightly better low grade alcohol.
Many alcoholic drinks do have different characteristics and flavour profiles. You also don’t need to go super high end to experience them. If you wanted to learn more go to a tasting event. You don’t need to spend a lot to access go quality stuff. In fact the higher quality accessable stuff isn’t marketed very well.
High end alcohols won’t taste like the very sweet soft drinks. If you want or expect something like that your not going to get it.
You also don’t like to eat you vegetables, probably.
Wrong. Lol.
You probably believe the first thought that comes to mind regardless of what contradicts it.
There is the awful part of me who hopes someone accidentally breaks the bottle before it is sold.
Remember, whoever buys this, for whatever price, feels like they’re entitled to that money while children go without: food, water, shelter, electricity, and education.
They also have armies of useful idiots to defend them in the vain hopes they can join them.
Keeping it materially real. Don’t forget to have some fun though. :)
Would be a king to come with oranges I forgot in the fridge last winter.
Wuh?
I can’t get behind ancient alcohol. It’s a curious finding, but at this point it’s probably undrinkable. Like something you’ve forgotten in the fridge for too long.
Would be a king to come with oranges I forgot in the fridge last winter.
