Slashdot Mirror


The World's Strongest, Most Expensive Beer Served Inside a Squirrel

If you have $765 burning a hole in your pocket, and a penchant for drinking alcohol out of a taxidermied animal, the good folks at BrewDog have just the drink for you. Their latest creation, called The End of History, is a 110 proof beer that comes packaged in a variety of small stuffed animals.

228 comments

  1. Drink too much... by natehoy · · Score: 5, Funny

    So if you drink too much of this do you need to have a few cups of that coffee that can only be extracted after it's been crapped out by monkeys?

    --
    "This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
    1. Re:Drink too much... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So if you drink too much of this do you need to have a few cups of that coffee that can only be extracted after it's been crapped out by monkeys?

      civet cats.

    2. Re:Drink too much... by rasper99 · · Score: 2, Informative

      I think that would be a civit which is a cat like animal not a Monkey:
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civet

      Maybe you've taken exotic coffee to a new level.

    3. Re:Drink too much... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Funny how these things work..

      The story I heard was that villagers, in order to eke out a few coins during the coffee off season, would collect the crapped out beans from the luwak and sell it to the coffee companies. They were pulling a fast one...

      I've also heard that lobster was once fed to prisoners in Florida. Back then, it was the equivalent of eating rats and pigeons. Somehow it caught on and fast forward a few years and it's a delicacy...

      I heard the same thing about Chilean sea bass.

      Then there's this fish, called in some places a toad fish, that's now becoming a precious commodity.

       

    4. Re:Drink too much... by tiptone · · Score: 1

      Growing up on the Gulf of Mexico nobody ate Dorado dolphin until someone started calling it Mahi Mahi...

      --
      Please don't read my sig.
    5. Re:Drink too much... by Mister+Whirly · · Score: 1

      And nobody would think of eating a fish called "Slimehead", but since they changed the name to Orange Roughy, people can't seem to get enough of it.

      --
      "But this one goes to 11!"
    6. Re:Drink too much... by stonewallred · · Score: 1

      Yep, many of the once "trash" fish have been renamed and marketed to great profits.

    7. Re:Drink too much... by natehoy · · Score: 1

      I've also heard that lobster was once fed to prisoners in Florida. Back then, it was the equivalent of eating rats and pigeons.

      I don't know about Florida, but in Maine lobsters were so plentiful that they were originally harvested as fertilizer, then fed primarily to prisoners and indentured servants as a very cheap protein.

      Now people drop $20 (or more!) to have one cooked and served with drawn butter and a couple sides. Go figure.

      But, honestly, I can very much see that happening in Florida. I've had Florida lobster before, and if you ever knowingly served that stuff to a human being you should be charged with a violation of the Geneva Convention. ;)

      --
      "This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
    8. Re:Drink too much... by Gilmoure · · Score: 1

      Going fishing in the Gulf, I loved grunts. They're a smaller fish related to grouper and are just as tasty. Just have to clean a lot more as they're smaller.

      --
      I drank what? -- Socrates
    9. Re:Drink too much... by BlackSnake112 · · Score: 1

      Florida has spiny lobster. No claws, other then that it looks like a lobster. Not sure on how it tastes. Lobster is too chewy for me. And yes, I have tried it about 20 times. I have had the cook come out of the kitchen 3 times. Lobsters was the prized dish in those places. They wanted to know what was wrong. There was nothing wrong. Lobster is not for me.

    10. Re:Drink too much... by natehoy · · Score: 1

      Lobster is too chewy for me. And yes, I have tried it about 20 times.

      No offense, but at the prices they get for lobster, I'd have stopped at trying it once. It's a luxury food at the prices they get for it nowadays. There are plenty of really good foods out there that cost a hell of a lot less. :)

      Having said that, I've never found Maine lobster to be chewy unless it was horribly, terribly overcooked and rubbery.

      But I honestly don't know Florida lobster that well, so it may be a more chewy meat. I've only tried it once, and I don't remember the texture. I didn't like it well enough to bother trying it again (not when I have access to the good stuff here in Maine - LOL!)

      --
      "This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
    11. Re:Drink too much... by eugene+ts+wong · · Score: 1

      They should do that to all invasive animals. When the invasive animals are gone, we could encourage people to become vegetarians. When the weeds are gone, we could encourage people to eat more meat. Rinse. Lather. Repeat.

    12. Re:Drink too much... by Kell+Bengal · · Score: 1

      Let me know how the cane toad fillets work out.

      --
      Scientists point out problems, engineers fix them
      altslashdot.org: The future of slashdot.
    13. Re:Drink too much... by mhajicek · · Score: 1

      Why is that rated zero? It's relevant, and I know at least the lobster part is true.

    14. Re:Drink too much... by IndustrialComplex · · Score: 1


      Let me know how the cane toad fillets work out.

      Renamed to King-Frog. Sell it as upscale frog legs with more meat.

      --
      Out of modpoints but really liked a post? 1BDkF6TtmmeZ3yqXbz9yhdYVqRYnwFoXDj
    15. Re:Drink too much... by PitaBred · · Score: 1

      You found the proper Wikipedia page... why couldn't you spell it right in your first sentence? How does that happen?

    16. Re:Drink too much... by shnull · · Score: 1

      it seems a bit lame to drink it outside anything other than a stuffed taxidermist imo ... everything's illegal now, how come these whateveropaths escaped the rulepushers ? hunting animals with guns and stuffing animals to whatever purpose it is, is something i can not agree with. I wouldn't mind if hunters were allowed to hunt eachother but that would probably not do since it would involve some sort of risk and i suppose most of them are pretty much cowards (what else would it take to get your kicks out of shooting animals with hi powered rifles or shotguns from a distance? skill? bravery? 'culling the population'? don't make me laugh) . Hunting for anything other than necessity is to me a crime and taxidermy ... stuffing dead animals is, to me, a bit sick ... When we take over the world tonight, Pinky, we will shoot these people to their own planet where they have nothing to hunt and stuff but eachother. Then again, when we take over the world, Pinky, selling drink in plastic bottles will also be a capital offense :p I don't think they're ready yet

      --
      beware he who denies you access to information for in his mind, he already deems himself to be your master (SMAC-ish)
    17. Re:Drink too much... by CubicleView · · Score: 1

      Ah but what are your opinions on the breeding and slaughter of domesticated animals? It may not apply to you, but 99% of the people I meet who think that hunting is evil, consider eating meat and wearing leather to be perfectly ok(excluding leather pants of course). I dislike those people.

    18. Re:Drink too much... by fifedrum · · Score: 1

      deep fried, with some buffalo hot sauce on it... maybe.

    19. Re:Drink too much... by shadowfaxcrx · · Score: 1

      It's chewier usually - I'm not sure if that's because Florida lobsters are chewy, or because Floridians don't know how to cook lobster.

      But it's also a different flavor. Maine lobster is far superior.

      --
      "I disagree with you" does not equal "flamebait."
    20. Re:Drink too much... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They had a coffee made from beans crapped out by lemur-like critters . . . called Kopi Luwak. The Luwak looks like a lemur, and also kinda like a cat. The critter eats the beans, then craps them out - the coffee is made from the "preprocessed" beans. Apparently, it's insanely expensive.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kopi_Luwak

      And very, very disturbing.

    21. Re:Drink too much... by Yer+Mom · · Score: 1
      --
      Never mind Spamassassin. When's Spammerassassin coming out?
    22. Re:Drink too much... by shnull · · Score: 1

      i know, it's a bit hypocritical. If i had to kill my own animals i'll be eating humans in no time or turn veg. I try not too eat too much meat but i guess no one here is free from sin. You're right. Still i think there's a difference between just going out and shooting animals in the wild 'for sport' or killing them to stuff them and put them on display (and we're not talking museum here) and me eating dead animal for food.

      --
      beware he who denies you access to information for in his mind, he already deems himself to be your master (SMAC-ish)
    23. Re:Drink too much... by MBGMorden · · Score: 1

      Indeed. Tuna was once called "horse mackerel" - and still a primary ingredient in cat food because it was once thought of as a trash fish.

      Similarly, lobster used to be sold primarily as fish bait rather than food, and eating it was seen as something only "backwoods"/unsophisticated people did.

      Just goes to show, times change. Still, some fish I believe are just beyond saving. While SOME people eat them, I can't imagine bowfin or gar becoming choice meals ;).

      --
      "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
    24. Re:Drink too much... by Surt · · Score: 1

      You mean sugar cane toad fillets, right?

      --
      "Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
  2. One thing by ceraphis · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I just have to say, my vote for best article title ever. Felt like I was in some sort of slashdot dream seeing that pop up on the ol' RSS.

    1. Re:One thing by Tyr_7BE · · Score: 1

      I'm a fan of the punctuation possibilities myself.

      Is it the world's strongest, most expensive beer, served inside a squirrel? Or of all the beers served inside a squirrel, is this the strongest and most expensive? Nobody knows. Nobody knows.

    2. Re:One thing by shadowfaxcrx · · Score: 1

      If this were 30 years ago, it would be a Python sketch.

      --
      "I disagree with you" does not equal "flamebait."
  3. ew by iamhassi · · Score: 1

    ewwwwwwwwwwwwwww

    can i buy it without the squirrel?

    --
    my karma will be here long after I'm gone
    1. Re:ew by camperdave · · Score: 4, Funny

      can i buy it without the squirrel?

      Ah! For that, you'd want The World's Strongest, Most Expensive Beer Served OUTside a Squirrel.

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    2. Re:ew by Shakrai · · Score: 3, Funny

      can i buy it without the squirrel?

      Is the moose included with the squirrel or is that an additional fee?

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    3. Re:ew by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What a sick group of bastards. What the poor animal did to be stuffed and be like that?

    4. Re:ew by Gilmoure · · Score: 5, Funny

      Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read.

      --
      I drank what? -- Socrates
    5. Re:ew by camperdave · · Score: 1

      What the poor animal did to be stuffed and be like that?

      Drown in a vat of really strong beer?

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    6. Re:ew by wolfemi1 · · Score: 1

      can i buy it without the squirrel? Ah! For that, you'd want The World's Strongest, Most Expensive Beer Served OUTside a Squirrel.

      For some reason, as I read that it was narrated internally by Terry Jones. Kudos, sir! And get this man a Crunchy Frog!

    7. Re:ew by sv_libertarian · · Score: 1

      Sure. It comes with Moose instead.

    8. Re:ew by aqk · · Score: 0

      can i buy it without the squirrel?

      NO, DAMMIT!
      Don't you realize?
      You get to SHOOT the squirrel afterwards.

    9. Re:ew by arivanov · · Score: 1

      I had some european "fat" doormice (which is pretty much a smaller squirrel) do a few hundred pounds damage to my summer house. Pest from hell. Can dig, can climb, can go through sewerage and chew PVC sewerage pipework from the inside. Rats are lovely creatures compared to them.

      So, frankly, I have very little compassion for the taxidermy part of this marketing stunt. The more of them end up stuffed or in the compost bin - the better.

      The beer however is a different matter, I really do not see why one should pay that amount of money for a hangover of pangalactic proportions. That can be induced by much cheaper means.

      --
      Baker's Law: Misery no longer loves company. Nowadays it insists on it
      http://www.sigsegv.cx/
    10. Re:ew by laejoh · · Score: 1

      African or European squirrel?

    11. Re:ew by sg_oneill · · Score: 1

      African or European squirrel?

      European. Fully laden.

      --
      Excuse the Unicode crap in my posts. That's an apostrophe, and slashdot is busted.
    12. Re:ew by francoisroux · · Score: 1

      That was the first comment on /. that really made me LOL. Trust beer in a dead squirrel to achieve that...

    13. Re:ew by Beat+The+Odds · · Score: 1

      Yes... ve must get moose and scveral!

  4. BrewDog is just making fun of us by mmkkbb · · Score: 1

    Serious beer drinkers, YHBT.

    --
    -mkb
  5. Is it a beer? by sqlrob · · Score: 1

    Since there's freeze distillation (per here), is it still a beer?

    1. Re:Is it a beer? by mmkkbb · · Score: 2, Informative

      German Eisbocks are still considered beers, but at 55% alcohol, this is just really crappy infused whiskey.

      --
      -mkb
    2. Re:Is it a beer? by eln · · Score: 3, Informative

      Even if it's still technically beer, it isn't going to taste anything like beer. At beer's usually low alcohol content there are lots of subtle flavors that would get completely overwhelmed by the alcohol taste at 110 proof. You might as well just drink grain alcohol, it will probably taste about the same.

    3. Re:Is it a beer? by John+Hasler · · Score: 1

      > ...is it still a beer?

      No,

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    4. Re:Is it a beer? by KumquatOfSolace · · Score: 1

      It's kind of like dehydrated beer...

    5. Re:Is it a beer? by stonewallred · · Score: 2, Informative

      Oh no dear low UID. The differences in flavor between a 55% alcohol beer or liquor and 190 proof grain alcohol is magnitudes apart. You can guzzle most 90-110 proof liquors straight from the bottle with no real problems, but you won't do it without major damage with everclear (190 proof). Difference between waving your finger quickly through a butane lighter flame and slamming it on a red hot stove burner.

    6. Re:Is it a beer? by apepooooop · · Score: 1

      No. But it is still worth the read for the most expensive distilled malt beverage served inside a squirrel.

    7. Re:Is it a beer? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yes it is.
      It's brewed with hops, barley, water and yeast, amongst others, therefore it's a beer.
      Whiskey does not contain any hops.

    8. Re:Is it a beer? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The alcohol itself has no taste.

    9. Re:Is it a beer? by JDevers · · Score: 1

      I've shot Gem Clear (a specific brand of 190 proof PGA) several times in the past. It burns, but isn't much worse than cheap vodka.

  6. Plus drugs! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Looks like there's cocaine on the table.

  7. Engineers & PETA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is how Engineers say a big "f**k you" to PETA.

    1. Re:Engineers & PETA by natehoy · · Score: 5, Funny

      Or at least re-doing the acronym.

      First it was "People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals"

      Next came "People Eating Tasty Animals"

      Now it's "Preserved Ethanol Tankard Animals"

      --
      "This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
  8. Wow. by chaboud · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Normally I'm not too put off by much of what anyone does, but the use of actual formerly-alive animals in this little costumed joke is pretty friggin' gross.

    Tongue-in-cheek doesn't even begin to describe it.

    If someone served up a line of dildos like this, animal rights folks (besides PETA) would be up in arms. That it's beer? That better be some pretty special-tasting beer to warrant such outlandish behavior. That said, $20k jeweled bottles of whiskey are similarly irksome.

    1. Re:Wow. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Squirrels are rodents. They are cute little pests.

      Furthermore, do you shed tears when people make exotic candy out of cockroaches or ants?

      What about people who make escargot?

      Hypocracy is only caring about the cute animals.

    2. Re:Wow. by John+Hasler · · Score: 1

      Normally I'm not too put off by much of what anyone does, but the use of actual formerly-alive animals in this little costumed joke is pretty friggin' gross.

      And formerly-alive plants as well! Ones on which fungi have been allowed to grow! In fact, it consists mostly of the excreta of yeast! Eeww!

      Have some cheese.

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    3. Re:Wow. by natehoy · · Score: 1

      Tongue-in-cheek

      Hey hey hey! This is about beer! No one said nothing about tongues! Sicko! ;)

      --
      "This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
    4. Re:Wow. by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      Squirrels are rodents.

      Are these free-range squirrels we're talking about?

      I hate to think they'd use caged squirrels for this. That's just inhuman.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    5. Re:Wow. by natehoy · · Score: 1

      Mmmmmm.. Yeast excretions. Make mine still in production, please. Bleu is OK, but if you've got something really ripe, make it a double.

      I like to hear the little yeasts scream as I eat them.

      --
      "This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
    6. Re:Wow. by emag · · Score: 1

      And to quote Denis Leary...

      There's the problem. We only want to save the cute animals, don't we? Yeah. Why don't we just have animal auditions. Line 'em up one by one and interview them individually. "What are you?" "I'm an otter." "And what do you do?" "I swim around on my back and do cute little human things with my hands." "You're free to go." "And what are you?" "I'm a cow." "Get in the fucking truck, ok pal!" "But I'm an animal." "You're a baseball glove! Get on that truck!" "I'm an animal, I have rights!" "Yeah, here's yer fucking cousin, get on the fucking truck, pal!" We kill the cows to make jackets out of them and then we kill each other for the jackets we made out of the cows.

      --
      "The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule." --H.L. Mencken
    7. Re:Wow. by ttyRazor · · Score: 1

      In the product description on the brewer's site they claim the animal pelts were obtained from roadkill.

    8. Re:Wow. by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Furthermore, do you shed tears when people make exotic candy out of cockroaches or ants?

      I'm fine with that so long as you actually eat them, or use them in some otherwise meaningful way.

      What's described in TFS is more akin to burning ants with a magnifying glass for "fun" - in a sense that "fun" is the sole reason, there's no utilitarian aspect here whatsoever.

    9. Re:Wow. by Sir_Lewk · · Score: 1

      I can't know for sure, but I'd wager that raising squirrels in cages would actually be more expensive than paying some local hunter a couple of dollars for a dead squirrel.

      Squirrels are all over the place, pay somebodies nephew to go out and get a few with his bb gun and you're good to go.

      --
      "linux is just DOS with a UNIX like syntax" -- Galactic Dominator (944134)
    10. Re:Wow. by serbanp · · Score: 1

      You'd think so. Where I live (suburbs), squirrels are truly a pest. No natural predator, plenty of food, they just destroy everything in my backyard: walnuts (never had a chance to taste them, they're gone long before they become edible), apples, strawberries (they eat even the buds!), cherries.

      Last year I relocated 55 (fifty five) of them and this year a new crop already replenished the pool. Too bad I can't shoot them and have to resort to cage traps... there is no love lost - I fully understand the UP's dogs reaction :P

      Given the above, I'd say that taxidermied squirrels as bottle covers are the only use one can find for them.

    11. Re:Wow. by AtomicOrange · · Score: 1

      Leary's standup on the subject is absolutely hillarious.

      "What are you?"
      "I'm a cow"
      "Get in the fucking truck"

      --
      "What is there a tank on the boat? WHY IS THERE A TANK ON THE BOAT?!?" L4D2
    12. Re:Wow. by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      do you shed tears when people make exotic candy out of cockroaches or ants? No, I just feel sick.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    13. Re:Wow. by Just+Brew+It! · · Score: 1

      Sounds like you need to get yourself some nice Belgian ales or German wheat beers. Many are naturally carbonated in the bottle (a.k.a. bottle conditioned) using live yeast. Swirl up the yeast sediment from the bottom of the bottle before you pour it into your glass, and you get to commit mass yeast murder with every sip!

    14. Re:Wow. by chaboud · · Score: 1

      Oh, don't get me wrong, I'm not vegan or anything, and I have no real issue with, say, eating or wearing squirrels.

      I just think that the gag doesn't really take very well. Basically, it's too try-hard to be funny. Additionally, I don't really want to drink my beer out of an animal.

      It's not gross because some cute fluffy creature died. It's gross because a beverage is served out of a corpse.

  9. The actual link by Bryansix · · Score: 4, Informative
  10. Does it come in other animal flavours? by Reilaos · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "Drunk off a skunk" is the closest I wish to come to "drunk as a skunk."

  11. Nuts by sv_libertarian · · Score: 4, Funny

    My cat just drank my beer and chewed up the squirrel.

    1. Re:Nuts by Rhacman · · Score: 1

      Well, I'm posting a few hours after you so at this point I'll assume the cat is now quite sessile and ready to be placed on a rack in the cellar for aging.

      --
      Account -> Discussions -> Disable Sigs
    2. Re:Nuts by AtomicOrange · · Score: 1
      --
      "What is there a tank on the boat? WHY IS THERE A TANK ON THE BOAT?!?" L4D2
  12. Condensation by Sponge+Bath · · Score: 4, Funny

    With the heat and humidity here, that pelt would get wet and nasty pretty quick. It would make the recycling bin look pretty wild also.

    1. Re:Condensation by adonoman · · Score: 1

      What kind of weirdo are you, drinking cold beer? You can barely taste it then.

    2. Re:Condensation by Anarki2004 · · Score: 1

      That's how we deal with the taste of domestic brews (I assume OP to be an american). MGD is even "cold filtered"...

      --
      The teachers will crack any minute, purple monkey dishwasher.
    3. Re:Condensation by Jeremy+Erwin · · Score: 1

      Cold Filtering, like Beach-wood Aging is used to increase the rate of beer production.

      Real Americans show their pride in American Industry by drinking Industrial Alcohol. Craft Beers are for luddites.

    4. Re:Condensation by julesh · · Score: 1

      With the heat and humidity here, that pelt would get wet and nasty pretty quick.

      Immersed in a 55%ABV liquid? I doubt it.

  13. Why..... by TechNit · · Score: 1

    Why.... Even though I don't drink alcoholic beverages anymore this doesn't instill interest in the product at all. Not even a little bit.... It's gross.

    --
    Sig?! Sig?! We don't need no stinking sig!!
  14. Hilarious PETA response in 3... 2... 1... by zero_out · · Score: 4, Informative

    Any moment, PETA will respond to this with some hilarious condemnation of using the carcasses of dead animals in a way that is disrespectful to the formerly living creature.

  15. I smell a trend by itomato · · Score: 1

    Absurdist elitist 'micro products' always pop up right when you need them.

    I think people could really use the lift provided by owning and consuming a $765 bottle of beer from furry organic coozie - with a tail and soft brown eyes.

  16. Well, at least we know what killed the squirrel. by Just_Say_Duhhh · · Score: 1

    As for what killed the guy who drank from the dead squirrel, we'll have to wait until the lab reports are finished.

    --
    I need trepanation like I need a hole in the head.
  17. There is not, and cannot be... by John+Hasler · · Score: 3, Informative

    ...any such thing as 110 proof beer.

    --
    Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    1. Re:There is not, and cannot be... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yeah, the brewery has a variety of distilled/fortified products that they consider beer, I think. If it's the same people I remember from some previous stories that is the case.

    2. Re:There is not, and cannot be... by Aboroth · · Score: 1

      As someone unfamiliar with this topic, why? I'm wondering what your definition of beer is, and if it has an arbitrary limit for alcohol content. Does the process for making beer necessarily limit the alcohol to around 10% max? I know for sure I've had beer with around that much alcohol and I never heard any beer connoisseurs complain that it wasn't actually beer.

    3. Re:There is not, and cannot be... by NotBornYesterday · · Score: 3, Informative

      Beer is a fermented beverage generally made from grain, perhaps some herbs/flowers/berries to flavor and/or preserve it, water, and yeast. Generally speaking, if you take a beverage like that and distil it, you've created a different kind of beverage; whiskey.

      --
      I prefer rogues to imbeciles because they sometimes take a rest.
    4. Re:There is not, and cannot be... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, as a matter of fact, 14% is the limit (at least for most wines... Not 100% sure about beers).

      The process involves yeast eating sugar (food) and shitting alcohol (poison). Higher % beers and wines are achieved by adding more sugar, resulting in a larger culture of yeast.

      At about 14% alcohol however, the environment becomes too toxic for even the yeast to live in, and adding more sugar only serves to make the drink sickly, syrop-y sweet.

      To achieve higher proof alcohols, distilling (or some other method maybe) is necessary.

    5. Re:There is not, and cannot be... by bm_luethke · · Score: 2, Informative

      What is exactly beer will differe for regions - a few have "purity laws": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reinheitsgebot

      However that doesn't include things like wheat beers which are obviously still beer, however they all are basically fermented barely, hops, and water - wheat, rice, fruits, vegetables, and other flavoring can be added (and make no mistake with them - a "fruit" beer can be VERY heavy, bitter, and alcoholic. There is no reason why one can not make a right tasty raspberry imperial stout and many homebrewers do).

      What the person you are asking is referring to is that beer are *fermented*, little living organism called "yeast" eat the sugers from the grains, fruits, or any others they can and turn it into alcohol (in a sense we are drinking their excrement). Since they are alive and it is a bilogical, not chemical, process these organism have tolerances for the environment they live in. As a brewer there are four basic ways you "stop" fermentation.. Commercial brewers usually ensure death of the little critters by pasteurizing the beer, few homebrewers have the equipment to do it (not to mention many of us hate the taste it imparts and would refuse even if we could). The more typical way is to have the yeast eat up all thier food and die out from starvation - if I put 3lbs of malts in a mash it will have a lower alcohol content than if I put 10lbs in there for that reason. The last, and least common way for beer makers is with a high enough alcohol content it kills them.

      For the latter most yeast strains die at about 10% per weight (do not know by volume), there are wine yeasts that will go into the ~15% and I have an especially hardy strain go nearly to 18% but that was only once (and the mead tasted terrible too, they produce more than alcohol and they ate so much of the sugars/body of the mead it was ... bad, those "other" products generally do not taste good). For the most part anything above around 12% by weight is going to be hard to do and take either luck (or really unlucky for a brewer)or a great deal of skill with keeping them alive.

      To go higher than that you need to distill the product or fortify it (which is adding distilled alcohols back into it to stop fermentation - port wines work that way). In which case it ceases to be beer and becomes something else. At 50% alcohol (most likely by volume) it is more akin to how you make many other spirits - you take a highly pure neutral alcohol and add some other liquid to get it to the proof you desire. Vodka would be cut with water, schnapps cut with a flavored sugar syrup, lemon-cello with a lemon zest extract and water, and then either sold as is (vodka) or aged in some process (wooden barrels for whiskey). In this case you would cut it with beer.

      As such it is, most definitely, *not* beer anymore.

      --
      ------- Sorry about the spelling, I suffer from two problems. Dyslexia makes it difficult to spell well, lazy makes it
    6. Re:There is not, and cannot be... by badboy_tw2002 · · Score: 1

      You can get barley wine up to 20 - 21%, and there are some zins that come in the heavy side at 17%. Some of its not bad if you have a taste for such a thing.

    7. Re:There is not, and cannot be... by bm_luethke · · Score: 1

      I also realized for those counting I said "four basic ways" and listed only three - the "raise the alcohol level to kill them" should include both letting them produce enough alcohol to sterilize their environment or add (fortify) alcohol to the brew to raise it's content. So the third one really has two methods.

      --
      ------- Sorry about the spelling, I suffer from two problems. Dyslexia makes it difficult to spell well, lazy makes it
    8. Re:There is not, and cannot be... by ThanatosMinor · · Score: 1

      There are other methods to increase the alcohol content besides distillation. Freezing, for example, works very similar to distillation since alcohol freezes at a lower temperature than water. Get a freezer between these two temperatures and then remove the ice. The finished product is still considered beer.

    9. Re:There is not, and cannot be... by BKX · · Score: 1

      There is another way to raise alcohol levels though. It's done to make ice wine (and a few beers, including the one in question, although not usually to the degree for the squirrel monstrosity). It's called freeze distillation generally, but it's not at all like distillation in the conventional sense. Basically, either before or after brewing (before brewing gives you a very sweet product, after gives you tons of alcohol) you lower the temperature of the liquid down low enough (but not too low) so that only the water freezes, and then filter out the ice crystals. This is kind of like how you can suck all the flavor out of a slurpy if you're not careful.

    10. Re:There is not, and cannot be... by John+Hasler · · Score: 1

      As someone unfamiliar with this topic, why? I'm wondering what your definition of beer is, and if it has an arbitrary limit for alcohol content. Does the process for making beer necessarily limit the alcohol to around 10% max?

      Yes.

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    11. Re:There is not, and cannot be... by John+Hasler · · Score: 1

      The finished product is still considered beer.

      Only by the marketing types trying to sell it.

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    12. Re:There is not, and cannot be... by Ornlu · · Score: 0

      To go higher than that you need to distill the product or fortify it... As such it is, most definitely, *not* beer anymore.

      The exception to you reasoning is, of course, Eisbocks. These are "high gravity" beers, with original specific gravity above 1.10. After fermentation completes, the alcohol content is usually between 9 and 12%. However, in order to further up the alcohol content, the beer is partially frozen and some of the water is removed.

      Remember that water freezes at exactly 0C, while alcohol and sugar saturated solutions don't freeze until well below that. By partially freezing the substance and then agitating it so that the crystallized water floats to the surface where it can be removed, you can remove only 100% pure water, leaving the favoroids and alcohol behind. For an eisbock, this results in a substance that is usually 1 to 3% ABV higher than the fermented-only substance.

      This is the technique that Brew Dog is using.

      The question remains though, is this "beer"? German brewers have been making Eisbocks for a long while; they are DEFINATELY "Beer". But this is a whole new calibre. I understand why they call this "beer", but it just seems akin to calling the sun a "space heater".

    13. Re:There is not, and cannot be... by John+Hasler · · Score: 1

      There is another way to raise alcohol levels though. It's done to make ice wine (and a few beers, including the one in question, although not usually to the degree for the squirrel monstrosity). It's called freeze distillation generally, but it's not at all like distillation in the conventional sense.

      It's still distillation and the result, though perhaps tasty, is not beer.

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    14. Re:There is not, and cannot be... by Ornlu · · Score: 0

      "Distillation" means to boil. This beer is made by freezing. Freezing /= boiling.

    15. Re:There is not, and cannot be... by Aboroth · · Score: 1

      Thanks for being so descriptive.
      What about the freezing technique another poster talks about, which increases alcohol content of the beer without distillation?

    16. Re:There is not, and cannot be... by Shagg · · Score: 1

      There isn't. They're using freeze distillation. Once you switch from "brewing" to "distilling", it's not really beer anymore.

      They can call it anything they want on the label, but you're right.

      --
      Unix is user friendly, it's just selective about who its friends are.
    17. Re:There is not, and cannot be... by Shagg · · Score: 1

      You're primarily limited by the alcohol tolerance of the strain of yeast that you select to do the fermentation. With some very special handling, I've seen breweries get this up to 20%, but nowhere close to 55%.

      The freezing technique they use is called "freeze distillation". Yes, it is a form of distillation, which means that technically this is not a beer anymore, but something else. They can call it whatever they want though, even if it is not correct.

      --
      Unix is user friendly, it's just selective about who its friends are.
    18. Re:There is not, and cannot be... by RocketRabbit · · Score: 1

      What if you just freeze it, so only the water is frozen, then pick the ice out?

      This is how some high alcohol wines have been made for thousands of years.

    19. Re:There is not, and cannot be... by NotBornYesterday · · Score: 1

      The finished product is still considered beer.

      I disagree. Whether it is distilled by fire or ice, concentrating the alcohol of a fermented beverage changes the nature of it. Cognac comes from fermented grapes, but it is not wine, it is a liqueur. I wonder what the BATF thinks about freeze-distillation?

      --
      I prefer rogues to imbeciles because they sometimes take a rest.
    20. Re:There is not, and cannot be... by Jeremy+Erwin · · Score: 1

      BrewDog uses "TurboYeast", which can withstand 22% alcohol. The brewers use freeze distillation to boost the alcohol content. source

    21. Re:There is not, and cannot be... by John+Hasler · · Score: 1

      > I wonder what the BATF thinks about freeze-distillation?

      That it is legal.

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    22. Re:There is not, and cannot be... by bm_luethke · · Score: 1

      That it the same process most use to make non-alcoholic "beer" - they just use the frozen part. That isn't beer either any more than using the liquid part of it is beer.

      If that is truly what they use to do that I wouldn't drink it. Not only is the latter part of the wiki article correct (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fractional_freezing) but you get all sorts of other compounds that contribute majorly to hangovers left in the concentrated alcoholic part.

      It's OK and can even be tasty in some cases (but I would argue that the true distilled versions are better - hence why even things like applejack tend to be distilled now), but once you go to much higher than 80 proof you really start having problems with methanol and fusels which are *not* good things to drink.

      There are a great deal of edge cases out there. You can also concentrate alcohol by supporting a smaller pot of the mash in a the middle of a larger pot. You then cover the both pots with plastic wrap so that as the alcohol evaporates out of the smaller pot it collects on the plastic wrap and condenses down into the bigger one. You can do this is want to ingest a great deal of methanol and fusels, run the risk of going blind or death, and at the least have a foul tasting concoction that will leave you with a raging hangover. You can, kinda sorta cut it down to where it is drinkable (as you can with freezing), but I wouldn't suggest it. Then again people have done it for many many years (though obviously with different materials than plastic wrap) so have at it if you want. Millions also do things like smoke two packs a day of cigarettes and live into their 80's and 90's and I wouldn't suggest that either.

      I rather assumed they would use safe *and* tasty methods to produce this and didn't list any that were not that. There are a myriad other ways to concentrate alcohol and outside of those four main methods I listed they are either dangerous, taste like crap, or both.

      --
      ------- Sorry about the spelling, I suffer from two problems. Dyslexia makes it difficult to spell well, lazy makes it
    23. Re:There is not, and cannot be... by Neil+Boekend · · Score: 1

      I am a hobby brewer and I have created a beer of about 12 %, although I do not have the lab to test the exact percentage (it can be found by the change in density). You can create a beer of more than 10% without freezing or distilling and there are some (not may) commercial beers of more than 10% out there:
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westvleteren_Brewery 10.2%,
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dubuisson_Brewery 12%
      and about half of the beers in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barley_wine

      This however is not a beer in my book. It is fortified and may have retained some properties of beer, but the process of increasing the alcohol % to something beyond what the yeast can do is removing the classification of "Beer" in my book.

      I would be interested however. How would a beer like substance of 55% taste? The price is a bit steep: If I wanted to spend so much on booze I'd get some decent islay, so I'd pretty much know it would be very good.

      --
      Well, I might have a way, but it only works on a semi spherical planet in a vacuum.
    24. Re:There is not, and cannot be... by Neil+Boekend · · Score: 1

      If they managed to get a yeast to 22% then the yeast will not be very good in other properties: taste for example. A good yeast adds about 10 % taste to your beer. It does this mostly by means of so called esthers: easily evaporating strong smelling organic componds. These esthers give a lot of details to the taste of the beer, like fruty. The malt can't provide for these, because it is heated above 100 degrees C for about two hours to lose DMS. The hopps provide some of them, but most of the hopps are also heated to 373 K for a while.There are usually some hopps added at the end of cooking for this reason (or they use dry hopping).

      --
      Well, I might have a way, but it only works on a semi spherical planet in a vacuum.
    25. Re:There is not, and cannot be... by LanMan04 · · Score: 1

      So eisbock isn't a beer? The Germans would disagree with you...

      --
      With the first link, the chain is forged.
    26. Re:There is not, and cannot be... by NotBornYesterday · · Score: 1

      Sweet! I'll probably try that next winter with a batch of home-brew.

      --
      I prefer rogues to imbeciles because they sometimes take a rest.
    27. Re:There is not, and cannot be... by Jeremy+Erwin · · Score: 1

      Given that "Sink the Bismark" recieved decent reviews of a sort I'd have to trust that they know what they're doing. Maybe the 18 month aging process helps.

      BTW, it's ester. No 'h'.

    28. Re:There is not, and cannot be... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Better go do some research. BATFE considers it the same as traditional distillation.

  18. Bestiality Beer by theghost · · Score: 1

    Two of macho men's favorite pastimes rolled into one. Getting hammered and making out with small woodland creatures. Hawt.

    --
    The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.
  19. Skunk? by rabblerabblerabble · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If they go bad will the squirrels turn into Skunks?

  20. 55%, not 110 proof by loufoque · · Score: 1

    Seriously, who uses that kind of meaningless notation anymore?

    1. Re:55%, not 110 proof by cosm · · Score: 1

      Meaningless is in the eye of the beholder, you obviously knew that the 'proof' rating divided by 2 gives the percentage of alcohol by volume, so in essence it has meaning. Not to mention, from a marketing standpoint, large numbers sound better, not to mention, average Joe shuts down when they even hear the word percent. What sounds better:

      "GhettoSip, the 65 proof thug companion."

      or

      "GhettoSip, the 32.5% alcohol by volume thug companion."

      --
      'We are trying to prove ourselves wrong as quickly as possible, because only in that way can we find progress.' RPF
    2. Re:55%, not 110 proof by swanzilla · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Seriously, who uses that kind of meaningless notation anymore?

      Jack, Jim, Jose, et al

    3. Re:55%, not 110 proof by cosm · · Score: 1

      Seriously, who uses that kind of meaningless notation anymore?

      You must not be an alcoholic. When I see 110 proof on the label, my mind doesn't go blank, it screams "OPPORTUNITY ABOUND MATEY". Only after a couple, does it become meaningless. Not to mention most of the English language, as well.

      --
      'We are trying to prove ourselves wrong as quickly as possible, because only in that way can we find progress.' RPF
    4. Re:55%, not 110 proof by rotide · · Score: 1

      It's both 55% and 110 proof. Just because you don't "like" the unit of measurement doesn't mean that every manufacturer of alcohol must all of a sudden stop using the unit. I would also submit that those who purchase the $765 beer probably know what "proof" means. You, on the other hand, probably should be finding other hobbies to spend your cash on, alcohol doesn't appear to be something you like and/or know much about.

    5. Re:55%, not 110 proof by ElectricTurtle · · Score: 1

      I'll drink to that!

      --
      I support the Slashcott and will not be reading or commenting from 2/10/14 to 2/17/14. Beta is steaming pile of dog shit
    6. Re:55%, not 110 proof by SnarfQuest · · Score: 1

      It makes it harder for the less-educated (i.e. typical beer drinkers) to figure out how to make this stuff cheaply. Drink half your bud, then refill with Everclear. Stuffing it in your grandmothers freeze-dried poodle is optional.

      --
      Who would win this election: Andrew Weiner vs Andrew Weiner's weiner.
    7. Re:55%, not 110 proof by julesh · · Score: 1

      Seriously, who uses that kind of meaningless notation anymore?

      Jack, Jim, Jose, et al

      Really?

      Bottle of JD, clearly labelled as 43%ABV: http://s169.photobucket.com/albums/u240/MTCOOLJ/?action=view&current=jack_daniels.jpg&mediafilter=images
      Bottle of Jim Beam, clearly labelled as 40%ABV: http://streetlegalplay.files.wordpress.com/2009/10/jim_beam_white.jpg
      Bottle of Jose Cuervo, clearly labelled as 40% ABV: http://drunkers.org/Jose-Cuervo_Black-Medallion%5B1%5D.jpg

      I agree the first two also include a proof figure, but it is in brackets and clearly subordinate to the percentage alcohol, indicating that the makers consider it a secondary measure. The Cuervo bottle doesn't include it.

    8. Re:55%, not 110 proof by ukgod · · Score: 1

      those who purchase the $765 beer probably know what "proof" means.

      Perhaps they would, but if they were paying £500 or £700 for a UK brewed beer then they would probably use the UK proof system too. I make it 96.25 proof. It cannot be 100 proof or above as its not alcoholic enough to support the combustion of gunpowder. Simply doubling the ABV has no meaning whatsoever.

    9. Re:55%, not 110 proof by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, because "proof" is different from country to country, i.e. the americans use a different version of it and probably call it english, like they get pints and gallons wrong and still call them english measurements.

    10. Re:55%, not 110 proof by pablodiazgutierrez · · Score: 1

      Only in the US.

    11. Re:55%, not 110 proof by ErkDemon · · Score: 1

      According to the product photos, the other beers on the company's website use clear ABV labelling. I don't know if the squirrel has a label. Maybe it has a handwritten tag tied with string to its foot or something.

    12. Re:55%, not 110 proof by ErkDemon · · Score: 1
      According to Wikipedia (cue mass sigh of disbelief), US Federal Law requires alcohol content to be displayed as an ABV percentage, and while a proof figure is //allowed//, if used, it has to be displayed near to the official ABV figure.

      If true, that suggests that, even in the US, ABV is now considered the proper legal method of citing alcohol content, and that the "proof" figure is just a historical/traditional hangover (sorry) .

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcoholic_proof#United_States

  21. Oh God. Rule 34 gets us again. by myocardialinfarction · · Score: 1

    And it doesn't even apply to porn in this case. Or at least I hope that's not porn.

    1. Re:Oh God. Rule 34 gets us again. by Locke2005 · · Score: 1

      Remember to always duct-tape your squirrel, so it doesn't explode when you...

      --
      I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
  22. Flavourful? by oldmac31310 · · Score: 1

    While I'm sure the beer is very flavourful, the presentation is tasteless.

    --
    http://www.acetonestudio.com
    1. Re:Flavourful? by John+Hasler · · Score: 1

      > While I'm sure the beer is very flavourful...

      I'm not.

      > ...the presentation is tasteless.

      So is calling anything with that much alcohol beer (but then tastelessness seems to be the point of the whole excercise).

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
  23. Freeze Distilation != Brewing... by nweaver · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The reason the alcohol content is so high is not that its brewed, but that its freeze-distilled: by freezing the water out (the alcohol has a lower freezing point).

    So calling it beer is really BS: its really a freeze-distilled whiskey.

    --
    Test your net with Netalyzr
    1. Re:Freeze Distilation != Brewing... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So what you're saying is that this is really just the newest incarnation of the novelty Jim Beam decanters?

    2. Re:Freeze Distilation != Brewing... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      to be considered a whiskey it must be aged in a wooden barrel

    3. Re:Freeze Distilation != Brewing... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thankyou for being the voice of reason. To the best of my knowledge, the strongest non-distilled beverage is Sam Adams Utopia, at around a max of 27%. What that means is that Sam Adams has developed yeast strains that can still survive up to 27% ABV. Beyond that, the yeast dies or at least goes dormant, and fermentation stops. To increase concentration beyond this requires separation of some sort, whether freezing out the water, or evaporating and condensing the spirits. To some people, freeze-distillation may not put the distilled liquid into a different category than beer, but for the purposes of law, it is no different than moonshine, unless the distiller is licensed - not that I agree with that requirement....

    4. Re:Freeze Distilation != Brewing... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or whisky since it's in Scotland ... but not even then because it hasn't spent 3 years in a bonded warehouse, so can't legally be called whisky anyway.

    5. Re:Freeze Distilation != Brewing... by AtomicOrange · · Score: 1

      Charred. Don't forget the charring of the wooden barrel, that's where the delicious flavor comes from!

      --
      "What is there a tank on the boat? WHY IS THERE A TANK ON THE BOAT?!?" L4D2
  24. On the other hand... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The fact that animals are being killed and stuffed not for consumption but to gaudily decorate a beer bottle, does kind of validate PETA's point, doesn't it. I don't support PETA the organization or their methods, but I do share their concern about how animals are used. It's one thing to raise an animal for consumption, and quite another to shoot and stuff a squirrel in order to use it as packaging.

    1. Re:On the other hand... by DarkKnightRadick · · Score: 1

      Perhaps they have squirrel farms where they raise squirrels just for this purpose?

      Also, squirrels are a major pest in several parts of the world (England, various locales in the US, etc.)

      --
      "There is a way that seems right to a man, but its end is the way of death." Proverbs 16:25 (NKJV)
    2. Re:On the other hand... by amicusNYCL · · Score: 1

      It's one thing to raise an animal for consumption, and quite another to shoot and stuff a squirrel in order to use it as packaging.

      Why are those different? Does the animal know the difference? If the animal did know the difference, would it really give a shit why someone is killing it?

      Also, lighten up Francis, the total number of animals killed here is 12 (7 stoats, 4 squirrels, and a rabbit), for the 12 bottles of beer they produced from this batch.

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
    3. Re:On the other hand... by demonbug · · Score: 4, Informative

      According to the original article, all of the squirrels and stoats used were roadkill (damn drunk drivers).

    4. Re:On the other hand... by blackraven14250 · · Score: 1

      From PETA's perspective, that's not any better.

    5. Re:On the other hand... by nateand · · Score: 1

      The actual brewdog.com article says they were all roadkill. Relax.

    6. Re:On the other hand... by AdamThor · · Score: 1

      Their website claims the animals are all road kill. Not that you can't still be offended if you want, just FYI.

      http://www.brewdog.com/blog-article.php?id=341

      --
      -- "Oh. This guy again."
    7. Re:On the other hand... by stonewallred · · Score: 4, Informative

      Fuzzy tailed fucking tree rats. Damn things eat all my pecans and walnuts every year. Hate the little bastards. On;y thing they are good for is the stew pot where you can make some mighty fine gravy from their cooked carcasses.

    8. Re:On the other hand... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      genius... their product perpetuates the means to garment their product...

    9. Re:On the other hand... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who said I was "offended"? If anything the worst part about this to me is that this will probably result in a rash of donations to PETA to fight this kind of thing in the future.

      But hey, I didn't want to harsh your flow.

    10. Re:On the other hand... by Sponge+Bath · · Score: 1

      ...raise squirrels just for this purpose?

      Aighton Bailey Anally Raped with a Beer Bottle Squirrel Farm

      Witness the invisible hand of the free market allocating resources.

    11. Re:On the other hand... by DarkKnightRadick · · Score: 1

      What? People Eating Tasty Animals would object to that?

      --
      "There is a way that seems right to a man, but its end is the way of death." Proverbs 16:25 (NKJV)
    12. Re:On the other hand... by DarkKnightRadick · · Score: 1

      You must live in Kentucky :p (it's a joke, I don't care where you live, could be Africa for all I care, just saying so you don't blow a gasket).

      --
      "There is a way that seems right to a man, but its end is the way of death." Proverbs 16:25 (NKJV)
    13. Re:On the other hand... by Pharmboy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I've had squirrel dumplings a few times, it is decent. Growing up, my dad (country boy turned retired military turned oil geologist) make sure we tried everything: rabbit, turtle, squirrel, and lots and lots of deer and fish. I still fish and clean and fry/bake my own. Don't hunt because I don't care for it, but there is something to the idea that if you are going to eat animals, you should be willing to actually obtain, clean and prepare them yourself at least once in a while. If someone can't handle that, then perhaps they should go vegetarian. Store bought meat is just hiring someone else to do your dirty work, which is fine as long as you don't pretend it wasn't an animal previously.

      --
      Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
    14. Re:On the other hand... by aqk · · Score: 0

      I don't support PETA the organization or their methods, but I do share their concern about how animals are used. .

      Yeah.. well.. MAN-
      I actually belong to PETA, but I see nothing wrong with dispatching the occasional squirrel
      But in my case, I would EAT the damn creature, before using its hide to cover a beer-can.
      You do the creature honour in this way instead of sacrilege.

      Why do I belong to PETA? Because every time I hear some yahoo rant "Duh.. dem stoopid PETA peepul! Why are dey so stoopid?", I just vow to renew my membership. or increase my donation.
      Bur believe me, if a rat or squirrel gets into my attic to chew on the insulation or electrical wires , if all else (live-trapping) fails, I will kill it.

    15. Re:On the other hand... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fuzzy tailed fucking tree rats. Damn things eat all my pecans and walnuts every year. Hate the little bastards. On;y thing they are good for is the stew pot where you can make some mighty fine gravy from their cooked carcasses.

      And now drinking out of!

    16. Re:On the other hand... by DarkKnightRadick · · Score: 1

      I know it was an animal and absolutely love it. LOVE IT. Fish raw (sashimi grade fish anyway), burgers and steaks rare, everything else medium-well to well.

      --
      "There is a way that seems right to a man, but its end is the way of death." Proverbs 16:25 (NKJV)
    17. Re:On the other hand... by Just+Brew+It! · · Score: 1

      According to their web site, all of the animals used were road kill.

    18. Re:On the other hand... by infinite9 · · Score: 1

      Make bon-bons. 50% peanut butter, 50% plaster of paris. It sets in their digestive tract and they starve to death. Works great. And some would say that they get the death they deserve.

      --
      Disconnect your television. Do your own research. Draw your own conclusions. They're probably lying. Don't be a sheep.
    19. Re:On the other hand... by pablodiazgutierrez · · Score: 1

      I've been saying this very same thing to non-vegetarian animal rights activists and people who generally find hunting for food disgusting. One thing is true: If I could choose between being a farm animal or a wild one that's hunted down, I'd pick wild every time.

    20. Re:On the other hand... by Pharmboy · · Score: 1

      I would agree, primarily because I know how poorly farm animals are treated. I'm definitely a meat eater, but it bothers me that we don't treat animals we harvest with better care until that fateful day.

      --
      Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
    21. Re:On the other hand... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And: being an animal would you rather live in a smelly cage being fed antibiotics and hormones, or live free and risking the hunter?
      Hunting done to eat the game with respect to the environment is a good idea.

    22. Re:On the other hand... by HopefulIntern · · Score: 1

      I feel the same way about cats. But people get upset when I cook their Fluffy/Mittens/AIDS-machine/Crap-factory ... even if I offer them the leftovers.

  25. Disgusting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...and pointless.

    1. Re:Disgusting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's what she said!

  26. Hangover? by lazlo · · Score: 4, Funny

    So I'm guessing in this case, the cure for a hangover would be the hair of the squirrel that bit you?

    --
    Pound! Bang! Bin! Bash! is this a shell script or a Batman comic?
  27. Why the stuffed animals by SnarfQuest · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Why do they need to include the stuffed animals. Just drink enough of this beer, and you will see all sorts of things without having to pay the outrageous price.

    And, what do you do with all the embalmed animals once you have drained them? You're drunk, there's a bunch of other drunk guys with you, there's a pile of fuzzy dead animals laying around. It all sounds like a perfect setting for something that's going to show up on COPS.

    --
    Who would win this election: Andrew Weiner vs Andrew Weiner's weiner.
    1. Re:Why the stuffed animals by demonbug · · Score: 1

      Why do they need to include the stuffed animals. Just drink enough of this beer, and you will see all sorts of things without having to pay the outrageous price.

      And, what do you do with all the embalmed animals once you have drained them? You're drunk, there's a bunch of other drunk guys with you, there's a pile of fuzzy dead animals laying around. It all sounds like a perfect setting for something that's going to show up on COPS.

      Well, I think we all know what Richard Gere would do...

    2. Re:Why the stuffed animals by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are buying me a new laptop... ASSHOLE.

      You made me spew beer all over it. Yes, I was just calmly drinking a cold one when you made such a funny remark that I coughed that shit all over.... Thank god I have a back up I can post to /. on!

      Whopps, I hit "Post Anonymously"

  28. Nonsense. by Chelmet · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Of course there could. But it would have to be 62.9% alcohol. The beer in the article, at 55% alcohol, is 96.25% proof, not the 110 quoted.

    1. Re:Nonsense. by sssssss27 · · Score: 2, Informative

      It depends on the country. In the United States alcoholic proof is double the alcohol by volume.

    2. Re:Nonsense. by DarkKnightRadick · · Score: 1

      50% alcohol = 100 proof

      --
      "There is a way that seems right to a man, but its end is the way of death." Proverbs 16:25 (NKJV)
    3. Re:Nonsense. by Chelmet · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Ah. It being a Scottish beer, brewed not far from me in fact, I was using the British notation - I didn't realise there were any others.

      If you read on where the 'proof' system came from, you'll quickly see that the american one is, in fact, nonsense, but I suppose that that's a debate for another day.

    4. Re:Nonsense. by adonoman · · Score: 1

      American or European proof?

    5. Re:Nonsense. by treeves · · Score: 0, Redundant

      I don't know....aaaaaaahhh!!!!

      -Tim the Enchanter

      --
      ...the future crusty old bastards are already drinking the Kool-Aid.
    6. Re:Nonsense. by Sir_Lewk · · Score: 1

      Well played sir, well played.

      --
      "linux is just DOS with a UNIX like syntax" -- Galactic Dominator (944134)
    7. Re:Nonsense. by pablodiazgutierrez · · Score: 1

      The point is that the bacteria that ferments grain into beer cannot live past a certain alcohol concentration. The same thing goes for wine, with the limit around 14-15% for most types.

    8. Re:Nonsense. by ErkDemon · · Score: 1

      50% alcohol = 100 proof

      Not in Scotland, where this beer is brewed.

      The problem here is that this is a European product, being written about by a US-centric website whose content then gets distributed worldwide, and whose authors don't realise (or perhaps don't particularly care) that they're using units that mean different things to readers in different countries.

      Like the US gallon isn't the same as the old Imperial gallon, and the US ton isn't the same as the old Imperial ton.

      Hell, before the metric system led to the inch being redefined as 2.54 millimetres, the US and British inches and feet were different, too.

      These sorts of local mismatches are one of the reasons why most of the rest of the world went over to the metric system. If you check the brewery's website, they avoid this archaic country-specific crap by specifying the alcohol content for their beers scientifically, as a percentage by volume (as opposed to using the local version of the "proof" system devised for whiskey, which I seem to recall was calibrated according to how high a cannonball went when you mixed the drink with gunpowder).

    9. Re:Nonsense. by DarkKnightRadick · · Score: 1

      (as opposed to using the local version of the "proof" system devised for whiskey, which I seem to recall was calibrated according to how high a cannonball went when you mixed the drink with gunpowder).

      That guy deserves a medal. (:

      --
      "There is a way that seems right to a man, but its end is the way of death." Proverbs 16:25 (NKJV)
  29. No more Paradox for me by ed · · Score: 1

    I like Brewdog beer, but this is just attention seking.

    They can go and take a running jump

  30. Oh dear by hickmott · · Score: 1

    Two girls / one squirrel, anyone?

  31. Yet another missed opportunity by Locke2005 · · Score: 1

    For $800, they should have roboticized the squirrel and made it do the "Hamster Dance"!

    --
    I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    1. Re:Yet another missed opportunity by The+Archon+V2.0 · · Score: 1

      For $800, they should have roboticized the squirrel and made it do the "Hamster Dance"!

      It's actually already built in: Drink a few and the squirrels will start dancing on their own.

  32. These stuff(ed) beer are not cheap... by Lead+Butthead · · Score: 1

    After a quick browse of their "store", it would appear that those thingies are 700 UK pounds a piece.

    --
    ELOI, ELOI, LAMA SABACHTHANI!?
    1. Re:These stuff(ed) beer are not cheap... by Captain+Centropyge · · Score: 1

      If you'd read TFA, it says they're $765 each. No need to even browse their store for a price.

      --
      Bite my shiny metal ass!
    2. Re:These stuff(ed) beer are not cheap... by GungaDan · · Score: 3, Funny

      700 pounds? That's a big fucking squirrel! Which makes that $1068.14 price tag seem not quite so bad...

      --
      Eloi are stupid, throw morlocks at them!
    3. Re:These stuff(ed) beer are not cheap... by Diantre · · Score: 1

      No need to do that, it's in TFS. Soon /.ers aren't even going to bother reading the title :)

  33. Re:Hilarious PETA response in 3... 2... 1... by nomoreunusednickname · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Grey squirrels are disrespectful to wildlife in Scotland. Nice to see them put to good use.

  34. Hrm by Psyko · · Score: 1

    I was thinking about getting a new pet, at least this one I wont have to clean up after!

    I will hug him and squeeze him and call him George, then drink all his beer'y goodness

    --
    01:36AM up 426 days, 2:46, 1 user, load average: 0.14, 0.11, 0.05
  35. Sold out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They are already sold out.

    =(

    1. Re:Sold out by ElectricTurtle · · Score: 2, Funny

      Ted Nugent bought them all.

      --
      I support the Slashcott and will not be reading or commenting from 2/10/14 to 2/17/14. Beta is steaming pile of dog shit
  36. Re:Hilarious PETA response in 3... 2... 1... by snookerhog · · Score: 1

    Any moment, PETA will respond to this with some hilarious condemnation of using the carcasses of dead animals in a way that is disrespectful to the formerly living creature.

    I disagree.

    I can't think of a nobler way for a rodent to be immortalized.

  37. Re:Hilarious PETA response in 3... 2... 1... by metlin · · Score: 1

    Yes, because showing care and concern for other creatures that inhabit this planet is something to be mocked at.

    (Although, kudos to the folks for using already dead roadkill.)

  38. Sounds like a Colbert Platinum segment... by Trip6 · · Score: 1

    ...would love to see what his writing staff does with this!

    --
    I hate being bipolar; it's awesome!
  39. Furries by Windwraith · · Score: 1

    In that video I see furries getting killed by huge sausages.

    Sorry what?

  40. It's still fermented; not technically distilled by darthservo · · Score: 1

    The wort is still fermented to create beer; they're playing with it further it after it's been fully fermented. In particular, as others have mentioned, these guys (as well as other breweries) are using a process referred to as the Eisbock method. It's thought of as a distillation, although it isn't technically a distillation.

    With whiskey distillation, the grain mash simply yields primarily alcohol (at least 95%) - that's why the end product of the distillation is clear and free of the majority of congeners and other flavors. With this beer, all they are doing is removing water, accomplished by freezing it above alcohol's freezing point but below water's. (The temperature needs to be very precise and water crystallization very closely monitored) Because only the water is being removed, the beer's flavors and other substances remain intact with this method, therefore still retaining the original properties of beer. Think of it as beer concentrate.

    --

    Prove it.

    1. Re:It's still fermented; not technically distilled by Braino420 · · Score: 1

      The wort is still fermented to create beer; they're playing with it further it after it's been fully fermented.

      When you make whiskey, the grain is also fermented. It's still not called mash when you drink it.

      It's thought of as a distillation, although it isn't technically a distillation.

      It is thought of as distillation because IT IS distillation, atleast by any definition of distillation that I know of.

      These are all just nitpicks; it really doesn't matter in the end. There just isn't a technical reason why it /should/ be called beer, just that it's widely considered to be such. I just wished they would come up with some cool name to better describe this, like beerbon or something. I think there is some really cool science going into actually brewing the beer to have a high ABV and in created a yeast strain strong enough to handle the high alcohol content. I still definitely would like to try some either way though :)

      --
      They call me the wookie man, I guess that's what I am
    2. Re:It's still fermented; not technically distilled by darthservo · · Score: 1

      When you make whiskey, the grain is also fermented. It's still not called mash when you drink it.

      Correct, whiskey is made from fermented grain mash - that's how they distill the alcohol *off*. The alcohol they collect from *off* the mash is what is retained and used - so no, the alcohol could not be called mash. The originating mash is discarded with whiskey; with the beer it is not.

      It is thought of as distillation because IT IS distillation, atleast by any definition of distillation that I know of.

      Fractional Freezing differs from true distillation in that the substance removed is 'poorer' than what it is leaving. With true distillation, the substance removed is 'greater' than what it is leaving. True distillation is really more about extracting the greater part. With these types of beers, the water (poorer) is removed, while the beer (greater) is retained. Again, the only thing being taken out is simply water; the flavors and complex characters of the beer remain.

      I still definitely would like to try some either way though :)

      Hear hear!

      --

      Prove it.

    3. Re:It's still fermented; not technically distilled by anagama · · Score: 1

      The originating mash is discarded with whiskey; with the beer it is not.

      Totally wrong. The originating mash in beer is discarded just as it is with whiskey. Where beer and whiskey differ is that when making whiskey, people leave out the hops (or who knows, maybe there is hoppy whiskey now). Here's how you mash grains for beer (mashing refers to the enzymatic reaction that converts complex starches into fermentable sugars): http://www.homebrewmart.com/mashing.html

      --
      What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
    4. Re:It's still fermented; not technically distilled by anagama · · Score: 1

      Sorry to post to myself, but I was not terribly clear when I said beer and whiskey are the same -- they start out the same with respect to the starch conversion of grain, but naturally, whiskey is also distilled after the wort is fermented (wort is the sweet liquid obtained from the mashing process).

      --
      What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
    5. Re:It's still fermented; not technically distilled by darthservo · · Score: 1
      Yes, sorry, my terms had been transposed. The wort is the result of the mash. Wort contains the sugars that are extracted from the grain - food for the yeast to make alcohol. When the yeast are added, the fermentation yields a beer.

      However, my point was that whiskey uses the alcohol that has been burned *off* a fermented grain mash. It is this particular method (burning *off* alcohol) that is the beginnings of what can become whiskey.

      So these types of beverages discussed in the story are still considered beers because the alcohol has not been evaporated off; it still remains within the original beer.

      --

      Prove it.

    6. Re:It's still fermented; not technically distilled by ErkDemon · · Score: 1

      It is thought of as distillation because IT IS distillation, atleast by any definition of distillation that I know of.

      A chemist or engineer would disagree. Technically, distillation is a specific process that involves evaporating a mixture of liquids and separating them by their different condensation temperatures. It's like what they do in oil refineries. The idea is to extract and isolate a particular desired chemical from the mix (in this case, ethanol).

      The process that //these// guys use to concentrate their beer by eliminating some of the water isn't distillation, it preserves the miscellaneous gunk that distillation leaves behind, and it's a method of water removal rather than alcohol purification (the increase in alcohol content is a desirable secondary effect). The idea is to try to keep the subtle mix of compounds created by the beer-brewing process, and reduce the water content without using any heating processes that might destroy the flavours.

      If you're in the brewing industry, you might be tempted to think of anything that reduces water content as being a form of "distillation", but that's not the correct scientific term for what's happening.

      Consider distilled water. If you buy distilled water for your car radiator, you expect it to have been evaporated and recondensed to leave behind all the nasties, if someone comes up with some other fancy water-purification method, then they aren't allowed to call the results "distilled", unless it really //is// distilled.

      I suppose that you might be able to get away with calling it "freeze distillation", because "freeze" would be a prefix qualifier that warns the consumer that the following word may not be literally true, like "sugar mice" aren't real mice, "rock salmon" isn't really salmon, and "prairie oysters" aren't really oysters. "Freeze distillation" isn't technically distillation, and if you tried to use the freezing process instead of "proper" distillation to make whisky, I doubt that you'd legally be able to sell the results as "real" whisky, because the process is different, and the chemical mix that ends up in the bottle would be different, too.

      Ideally, someone needs to come up with a fancy new name for the ice process.

  41. You can have my beer... by Sponge+Bath · · Score: 1

    ...when you pry it from my cold, dead squirrel.

    1. Re:You can have my beer... by countSudoku() · · Score: 1

      Done! Plus, there's something special to snack on with the SquirrelBrau:

      http://www.1beefjerky.com/squirrel-jerky.htm

      --
      This is the NSA, we're gonna geet U h@x0r5! Also, what is a h@x0r5?
  42. strange brew that's also good for you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That would be Kombucha.

  43. Bad marketing by mangu · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    This reminds me of that old joke about the Nazi staff meeting:

    -"Our plan is to kill six million Jews and one Argentinian"

    -"Why the Argentinian?"

    -"You see, no one cares about six million Jews"

    Moral of the story: when you add an unusual element to a set, the main part of the set loses focus.

  44. :{O by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The consequences of this beer will never be the same!

  45. Taxidermied animal by unity100 · · Score: 1

    as if that wasnt sick enough, they expect you to drink expensive bear from it .... i dont know which is sicker.

    1. Re:Taxidermied animal by Just+Brew+It! · · Score: 1

      I don't think it's particularly sick... just seriously warped. It's not like the beer is actually in contact with the innards of the animal, and you really should pour it into a glass before drinking it anyway. Though I suppose seeing a dead squirrel puking beer into your glass could be a little off-putting for some! :D

  46. Re:Hilarious PETA response in 3... 2... 1... by BlueParrot · · Score: 1

    I think PETA has a lot of morons, but I also have to say this does disturb me. Not so much in the ethical way (they used roadkill after all), but rather in the "what kind of morbid person would want a drink served in a dead animal" kind of way. Pretty similar reasons why I don't eat other creatures.

  47. Not a whiskey by darthservo · · Score: 1

    The reason the alcohol content is so high is not that its brewed, but that its freeze-distilled: by freezing the water out (the alcohol has a lower freezing point).

    So calling it beer is really BS: its really a freeze-distilled whiskey.

    Incorrect. Beer is brewed with the methods of mashing, hopping (optional), and fermenting. Whiskey is similar in how the mashing and fermenting is done. However, that is where the similarity stops. Look at the difference:

    Whiskey: The fermented whiskey mash is distilled - the alcohol is evaporated off the mash. The result is a clear, at least 95% alcohol solution which is then mixed with water (decreasing alcohol percentage) and stored in barrels along with any other additives. The originating whiskey grain mash is discarded.

    Beer: The fermented beer mash stays how it is. Alcohol is not boiled off. This result is a grain-based, yeast fermented alcohol with flavors and characteristics intact.

    Eisbock method: (fractional freezing; an additional method used for these high gravity beers) The original beer with the fermented (not distilled) alcohol is chilled below water's freezing point, but above alcohol's. Crystallized water is then removed. The alcohol remains in the beer; its percentage goes up because water has been removed. The yeast's produced alcohol is not removed and isolated. The yeast still have done their fermenting job, their alcohol remains intact within the beer. The beer itself (flavors and alcohol) is just being concentrated.

    Had they removed the alcohol from off the beer, it would then be a prelude to whiskey. It would also be clear until they started adding things to it. It's beer.

    --

    Prove it.

  48. Re:Hilarious PETA response in 3... 2... 1... by John+Hasler · · Score: 1

    > Pretty similar reasons why I don't eat other creatures.

    In other words, they've got their religion, you've got yours.

    --
    Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
  49. So... by dogsbreath · · Score: 1

    Not being interested enough to look at the source video, dare I ask what part of the animal is the drinking spout?

  50. Speaking of PETA, by Butterforge · · Score: 1

    Is this the world's first non-vegan beer?

    1. Re:Speaking of PETA, by Just+Brew+It! · · Score: 2, Informative

      Actually, no. British cask conditioned ales have traditionally used a substance called isinglass as a clarifying agent. Isinglass is made from the swim bladders of fish. There are apparently also a few breweries that use oysters as an ingredient in Stout.

  51. Re:Drink, Chuck! (or swallow) by aqk · · Score: 0

    Cat? Monkey? WTF...?

    Lissen,you pussies-
    I want coffee brewed from beans shat out of Chuck Norris's ass!
    And maybe beer that's been burped by Chuck!

  52. Why?! by tecnico.hitos · · Score: 1

    Why in the world would anyone want to buy that, even if it was cheap?

    Who thought those taxidermized squirrels would be a good idea?

    --
    The good, the evil and the vacuum tubes.
    1. Re:Why?! by Just+Brew+It! · · Score: 1

      The Brewdog guys are nuts. They've been having a pissing match with another brewery for a couple of years now, where they're both trying to claim the title of "world's strongest beer". It is a bragging rights sort of thing... kind of like a $2,000 quad-SLI video card setup. I guess they just decided that their latest entry in the "beer strength wars" needed to have some very... *ahem*... "unique" packaging.

      I've had some of their other (normal strength) beers before. I wasn't particularly impressed.

    2. Re:Why?! by Yer+Mom · · Score: 1

      kind of like a $2,000 quad-SLI video card setup

      I have a sudden mental image of someone using a dead badger as a PC case.

      Best not to imagine where the USB ports are, I think...

      --
      Never mind Spamassassin. When's Spammerassassin coming out?
  53. Re:Does it come? ask the squirrel by aqk · · Score: 0

    LOL! ROFL! (As a perpetual /. bad karma guy (they hate me here), sadly I have no modpointz to give you)

    ...Reminds me of an old friend who once told me- "Geez man I was sooo pissed last nite that I blew chunks!"

    me: "Hey man! It's OK! We've all done that on occasion."

    "You don't understand! Chunks is my pet squirrel!"

    ..huh. No wonder I have bad karma.

  54. Anonymous Coward by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Does freeze distillation concentrate nasty stuff, i.e. methanol, propanols, butanols, weird ketones, etc? I understand that yeast create these side products in small quantities, and in standard distillation, temperature/pressure range control helps to keep them out of the product.

  55. NOT DISTILLATION by TheMeuge · · Score: 1

    It is thought of as distillation because IT IS distillation, atleast by any definition of distillation that I know of.

    That is incorrect.

    In thermal distillation, you're removing the alcohol from the mix (to condense it).

    Using this process, you're removing water from the mix.

  56. Linux Beer by ErkDemon · · Score: 1
    I notice that BrewDog's 32% ABV beer (which comes in a more conventional bottle), is called Tactical Nuclear Penguin.

    I think that the Linux community should consider adopting it as their beer of choice.

  57. Re:Freeze Distilation != Normal Distillation... by unixan · · Score: 1

    There, fixed it for you.

    No, I'm not kidding. Remember brewing is the alcohol-creation step before distillation.

    The fact that this is freeze-distilled still makes it beer: unlike normal (boiling) distillation, you keep the wash, not the distillate. (How they avoid making it taste like ass is another question.)

    --
    This signature intentionally left unblank.
  58. Re:Freeze Distilation != Normal Distillation... by SgtChaireBourne · · Score: 1

    If you have any contacts at the site you linked to, "home distiller", then have them fix their web site and get rid of or at least minimize all the scripting.

    --
    Beta is broken and the link to classic doesn't work. Stop wasting our time or there won't be anybody left here.