Monday, November 09, 2015

World Ends


at least as far as Eli is concerned.  The wort in Brussels is not cooling because of the warm evenings and the lambics and geuzes are not fermenting.  Already two vital months have been chopped off the brewing schedule and it will only get worse as temperatures increase.

Who will fund Eli's pilgrimage to Belgium before the worst happens?  Contribute to a worthy cause.

9 comments:

afeman said...

I'm saving for myself. This was worse than the "less sex" thing.

Entropic man said...

Everyone has their own tipping point.

For many Lose Angelinos climate change became real when it killed their lawns.

Russell Seitz said...

To avoid wasting all those rasberries just spike your unfermented lambic with Scottish wine and ship it around the eqator a few times.

http://vvattsupwiththat.blogspot.com/2015/10/what-ever-has-bishop-been-drinking.html

Aaron said...

Just tell your wife she needs to see the lace and fine needle work.

The beer is very good, but the textiles are better.

On the other hand, UC Davis has turned out some of the best beer makers in the world and not all of them went back home to Flanders.

EliRabett said...

Ms. Rabett already knows, but the problem is that lambic requires the wild yeast only found around Brussels in moldy barns.

Russell Seitz said...

Two Squibnocket barns have thus far been converted to mold entirely.
Would you care to lease the one remaining as a brewery ?

Nick Barnes said...

Find a cooler cellar for your wort tanks?

Bernard J. said...

One wonders whether the yeast might move north to the moudly barns of Scandinavia. If only.

Hank Roberts said...

So if it's not CO2, then maybe it's Climate Relativity?
Where is our Climate Einstein when we need him?
Take a lesson ....

http://arstechnica.com/science/2015/11/the-messy-reality-of-science-revealed-by-the-long-hunt-for-a-missing-planet/

----excerpt----
... At every stage of Vulcan’s history, there was tantalizing evidence suggesting something was there, but there was never enough to confirm it.

How does science deal with such a conflict? How should it? On the one hand, Vulcan was theoretically necessary and had some observational support; on the other, it didn’t appear with the consistency it should have if it was there.

... this is where real science diverges from the idea of science taught in high school. We're told that if a theory's predictions fail, we need to modify it or consider discarding the theory. But the reasons for expecting Vulcan were too powerful to be immediately discarded—the Newtonian framework, which had been so successful, wasn’t about to be abandoned without a fight.

Multiple attempts were made to fix this. Perhaps Le Verrier’s calculations just needed to be tweaked. Maybe some astronomers were looking in the wrong place or at the wrong time.

There were a lot of legitimate ways to fix the problem. Vulcan’s mass and orbit could be adjusted such that it still explains Mercury’s orbital precession, but it also wouldn’t have shown up in planned observations. Some of the solutions even went so far as to imagine a series of small, asteroid-sized bodies, in this case dubbed Vulcanoids. But no matter how many times the calculations were adjusted, researchers just couldn’t quite spot the planet consistently....

----end excerpt-----