[typomatic]

> the difference (and ability to describe the difference) between a Sauvingon Blanc and Chardonnay isn't difficult. I think anyone off the street can taste the difference between a chocolate stout, a hefeweizen and a pale lager.

I'd like to observe that when you wanted to claim that wines were indistinguishable, you picked two wines that were quite similar. When you wanted to claim beers were distinguishable, you picked chocolate stout vs hefeweizen, which is clearly not the same sort of example.

[unethical_ban]

I don't know what I don't know. I guess what I'm saying is, to the non-discerning wine drinker, there is red and white. Perhaps sweet vs. dry in there. It is much more difficult to taste the "dark fruit" and "light fruit" differences in particular reds than it is to taste the presence of certain overpowering notes in almost every beer. Wine is more subtle.

With beer, everything except pale lager tends to have a distinct flavor of some kind, that can be named easily. Chocolate, wheat, fruit, corn (Keystone), etc.

[typomatic]

You have quite a lot of opinions on a topic which you admittedly don't know.

[unethical_ban]

I was actually trying to be polite and humble, since I've tasted at least 700 distinct beers and probably about 80 wines. I do have my opinions, and the servers in any decent establishment will not insult the person who likes a drink "because it tastes good".

You have quite an offputting smugness, triggered by such a light and otherwise friendly discussion.

[cycrutchfield]

And you have quite an offputting ignorance, which you show no qualms about putting on display for everybody to see.

Seriously? Comparing sauvignon blanc and chardonnay to a chocolate stout and a pale lager? Are you intentionally trying to be disingenuous?

[typomatic]

Well, forgive me for being smug to someone that deserves it.