Subject: Humulus and Siblings
Date: 1989-06-09 15:22:41 GMT
ERIK A. HENCHAL writes:
> Excuss me a minute, while I flame. 1) Hops and that other herb
> to which you are referring, besides being plants, are not
Not much of a flame, but feel excused. Hops and whacky weed ARE
genetically related, though. Perhaps some brewing bioligist
can inform us how.
> 2) Why would you put anything in beer or encourage others to
> use ingredients which contribute negatively to the
> flavor and natural aroma of beer?
I suspect that there is a hidden agenda here. I don't suspect
that this person was intending to negatively affect the taste of
the brew. I would guess that they were interested in the psycho-
active quality that it could impart. Is that any clearer?
> 3)If you want to use drugs, go ahead. But if you want to brew
> REAL beer, use only hops, malt, water and yeast.
I'm sure that I won't be the first to point out to you that the
ethyl alcohol in beer is much more of a drug than the by-product
of a pot plant. And for your beer purity grail, I must just
laugh. You don't use Burton salts or other water tempering
techniques? How about the lining of the floatation bladder of
the sturgeon fish, otherwise know as issenglas finings? Amalyse
enzymes that converted the malts to sugars? Guano on your
malt pods? Perhaps you get the picture. Who cares about
some unachievable purity ideal when the drinkability of the
brew is all that really matters.
> a.e.mossberg says later:
> Now, I... er.. a friend did this, but did not replace the
> Humulus with Cannabis but merely reduced the former, and
> added a quantity of the latter.
I must ask - did it produce any "interesting" results from this adjunct?
Michael Berry ARPA:mcb%hpfcls@hplabs.HP.COM UUCP:hplabs!hpfcla!mcb
The posts that comprise the Homebrew Digest Searchable Archive remain the
property of their authors.
This search system is copyright © 2008 Scott Alfter; all rights reserved.