Posted Mon Jan 9, 2012, 5:29pm Subject: Re: Starbucks Newest Big To Do
Chang94598 Said:
The link previously provided already has plenty of bibliography with various authors. Many of the authors in the Flament book, and methods and materials, are searchable, and referenced in other works, like Illy and Lenoir.
It would be your responsibility to search for your own knowledge. As one professor told me when I was in training, he would not silver spoon feed me the information.
Sorry, that does not cut it. Unless specific references can be provided by you to support your argument then I can only conclude that you are not able to support your argument.
On another note, this thread has gone seriously off topic, partly of which I am responsible. In the near future to better service the arguments we can take this up again on a thread specifically devoted to cupping description controversies.
Len
"Coffee leads men to trifle away their time, scald their chops, and spend their money, all for a little base, black, thick, nasty, bitter, stinking nauseous puddle water." ~The Women's Petition Against Coffee, 1674
Chang94598 Senior Member Joined: 24 Oct 2007 Posts: 207 Location: SF Bay Area
Posted Mon Jan 9, 2012, 8:16pm Subject: Re: Starbucks Newest Big To Do
CoffeeRoastersClub Said:
Sorry, that does not cut it. Unless specific references can be provided by you to support your argument then I can only conclude that you are not able to support your argument.
On another note, this thread has gone seriously off topic, partly of which I am responsible. In the near future we can take this argument up again on a thread specifically devoted to cupping description controversies.
I usually do not do research for students, especially ones with attitude; kills the enthusiasm to help. But here are just a few, found in 5 minutes. Literally there are hundreds of similar articles.
Also read page 201 of Espresso Coffee edited by Illy. The Illy and Flament books gave plenty of references, and I do not understand the reluctance to read.
Similar compounds can be ordered from Aldrich online. Additionally, in the Coffee Nose, it is vial #13.
The esters have a typically fruity aroma. The methylbutyrate/methylbutanal has a boiling point of about 113c, and therefore with longer and darker roasting, this varietal aroma is mostly destroyed. It is considered an "enzymatic" aroma by Lingle. It is often associated with dry processed Ethiopian coffee, but in fact can be found in dry processed beans almost everywhere. The recent Don Pachi has plenty of it. I have also found it in inexpensive Mexican coffee.
Posted Tue Jan 10, 2012, 6:38am Subject: Re: Starbucks Newest Big To Do
CoffeeRoastersClub Said:
Sorry, that does not cut it. Unless specific references can be provided by you to support your argument then I can only conclude that you are not able to support your argument.
Again, this is the type of position I see most among people who don't actually want to learn truth - they're comfortable with what they believe, and will hold onto it until somebody forces them out of that comfort with proof after proof after proof (but they wouldn't dare seek out such proof themselves). I'm sorry, but you've so thoroughly and repeatedly betrayed that sense of obstinateness that it would be disingenuous not to point it out.
Posted Tue Jan 10, 2012, 7:17am Subject: Re: Starbucks Newest Big To Do
Agreed that a mod should split these last few posts off into a new topic, if possible (please).
In the meantime, since I'm not a chemist and don't have time to train up and become one for the sole purpose of making a more effective argument in this thread, here's a question for the "notes" skeptics: what do you find natural-processed coffees smell/taste like if not berries (blue- or otherwise)? It does depend on the coffee to some extent, of course, but you get my point, right?
Coffee descriptions are way over-the-top sometimes (e.g. *Meyer* lemon, *fresh-cut* fir, red cherry Starburst), sure, but let's not throw the baby out with the bath water!
At min 1:25 of the video one of the roasters states "roasting coffee at Starbucks, I mean it's the pinnacle Of the specialty coffee industry, no body is doing what we do."
Even though now acknowledged as off topic, as the OP I claim Executive Priviledge and give this gentlemans remark a +1.
Len
"Coffee leads men to trifle away their time, scald their chops, and spend their money, all for a little base, black, thick, nasty, bitter, stinking nauseous puddle water." ~The Women's Petition Against Coffee, 1674
Posted Tue Jan 10, 2012, 11:30am Subject: Re: Starbucks Newest Big To Do
Fine, but that remark does little to advance the off-topic discussion and fails to even support the main assertion found in it, namely that the proponents of your position have "science" behind them.
By the way, what *is* your position? That all/most/some cupping descriptions are BS? If so, ok, but that's not really a clearly formulated null hypothesis that someone could argue against. If you just wanted to rant originally, no worries. If not, let's kick it up a notch (assuming these posts will be split off).
The most specific claim I saw was:
CoffeeRoastersClub Said:
There is no science behind a coffee bean having chemicals in it that produce a blueberry note. There are no chemicals in it that produce a leather note.
Then along came Chang94598, the closest this thread has to a chemist from what I can tell (though it would be good to know for sure), with a partial rebuttal re: the chemical basis of blueberry notes in coffee. Not sciency enough for you? I'd say the ball's in your court now. Just because the power of suggestion is a documented phenomenon in psychology doesn't mean that it's responsible for all coffee descriptors that a given person might disagree with.
Symbols: = New Posts since your last visit = No New Posts since last visit = Newest post
Forum Rules: No profanity, illegal acts or personal attacks will be tolerated in these discussion boards. No commercial posting of any nature will be tolerated; only private sales by private individuals, in the "Buy and Sell" forum. No cross posting allowed - do not post your topic to more than one forum, nor repost a topic to the same forum. Who Can Read The Forum? Anyone can read posts in these discussion boards. Who Can Post New Topics? Any registered CoffeeGeek member can post new topics. Who Can Post Replies? Any registered CoffeeGeek member can post replies. Can Photos be posted? Anyone can post photos in their new topics or replies. Who can change or delete posts? Any CoffeeGeek member can edit their own posts. Only moderators can delete posts. Probationary Period: If you are a new signup for CoffeeGeek, you cannot promote, endorse, criticise or otherwise post an unsolicited endorsement for any company, product or service in your first five postings.
= No New Posts since last visit 