Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

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

samzenpus posted more than 4 years ago | from the it-still-beats-toe-drinks dept.

Idle 228

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.

cancel ×

228 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Drink too much... (5, Funny)

natehoy (1608657) | more than 4 years ago | (#32993952)

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?

Re:Drink too much... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32994204)

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.

Re:Drink too much... (2, Informative)

rasper99 (247555) | more than 4 years ago | (#32994286)

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

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

Re:Drink too much... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32994794)

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.

 

Re:Drink too much... (1)

tiptone (729456) | more than 4 years ago | (#32995006)

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

Re:Drink too much... (1)

Mister Whirly (964219) | more than 4 years ago | (#32995246)

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.

One thing (3, Insightful)

ceraphis (1611217) | more than 4 years ago | (#32993954)

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.

ew (1)

iamhassi (659463) | more than 4 years ago | (#32993980)

ewwwwwwwwwwwwwww

can i buy it without the squirrel?

Re:ew (4, Funny)

camperdave (969942) | more than 4 years ago | (#32994046)

can i buy it without the squirrel?

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

Re:ew (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32994206)

which would be a different beer, since there are significantly stronger and more expensive beers than this available in bottles. The liquor store I used to shop at in college sold a beer that was 120 proof and cost well over $1000 per bottle, and I don't think that was even the strongest or most expensive you could get.

These stuff(ed) beer are not cheap... (1)

Lead Butthead (321013) | more than 4 years ago | (#32994574)

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

Re:These stuff(ed) beer are not cheap... (1)

Captain Centropyge (1245886) | more than 4 years ago | (#32994884)

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

Re:ew (3, Funny)

Shakrai (717556) | more than 4 years ago | (#32994864)

can i buy it without the squirrel?

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

BrewDog is just making fun of us (1)

mmkkbb (816035) | more than 4 years ago | (#32993984)

Serious beer drinkers, YHBT.

Is it a beer? (1)

sqlrob (173498) | more than 4 years ago | (#32993990)

Since there's freeze distillation (per here [metro.co.uk] ), is it still a beer?

Re:Is it a beer? (2, Informative)

mmkkbb (816035) | more than 4 years ago | (#32994032)

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

Re:Is it a beer? (3, Informative)

eln (21727) | more than 4 years ago | (#32994060)

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.

Re:Is it a beer? (1)

John Hasler (414242) | more than 4 years ago | (#32994210)

> ...is it still a beer?

No,

Re:Is it a beer? (1)

KumquatOfSolace (1412203) | more than 4 years ago | (#32994898)

It's kind of like dehydrated beer...

Plus drugs! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32993992)

Looks like there's cocaine on the table.

Engineers & PETA (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32994002)

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

Re:Engineers & PETA (5, Funny)

natehoy (1608657) | more than 4 years ago | (#32994728)

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"

Wow. (0, Redundant)

chaboud (231590) | more than 4 years ago | (#32994026)

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.

Re:Wow. (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32994208)

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.

Re:Wow. (1)

PopeRatzo (965947) | more than 4 years ago | (#32994796)

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.

Re:Wow. (1)

emag (4640) | more than 4 years ago | (#32994972)

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.

Re:Wow. (1)

John Hasler (414242) | more than 4 years ago | (#32994376)

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.

Re:Wow. (1)

natehoy (1608657) | more than 4 years ago | (#32994810)

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.

Re:Wow. (1)

natehoy (1608657) | more than 4 years ago | (#32994774)

Tongue-in-cheek

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

Re:Wow. (1)

ttyRazor (20815) | more than 4 years ago | (#32995050)

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

Does it come in other animal flavours? (3, Insightful)

Reilaos (1544173) | more than 4 years ago | (#32994040)

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

Nuts (4, Funny)

sv_libertarian (1317837) | more than 4 years ago | (#32994042)

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

Re:Nuts (1)

Rhacman (1528815) | more than 4 years ago | (#32995302)

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.

Condensation (4, Funny)

Sponge Bath (413667) | more than 4 years ago | (#32994050)

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.

Re:Condensation (1)

adonoman (624929) | more than 4 years ago | (#32994614)

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

Re:Condensation (1)

Anarki2004 (1652007) | more than 4 years ago | (#32995368)

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

Why..... (1)

TechNit (448230) | more than 4 years ago | (#32994054)

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.

Hilarious PETA response in 3... 2... 1... (4, Informative)

zero_out (1705074) | more than 4 years ago | (#32994058)

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.

On the other hand... (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32994284)

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.

Re:On the other hand... (1)

DarkKnightRadick (268025) | more than 4 years ago | (#32994558)

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.)

Re:On the other hand... (1)

blackraven14250 (902843) | more than 4 years ago | (#32995034)

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

Re:On the other hand... (1)

amicusNYCL (1538833) | more than 4 years ago | (#32994876)

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.

Re:On the other hand... (4, Informative)

demonbug (309515) | more than 4 years ago | (#32994878)

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

Re:On the other hand... (1)

nateand (1487549) | more than 4 years ago | (#32995044)

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

Re:On the other hand... (1)

AdamThor (995520) | more than 4 years ago | (#32995372)

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 [brewdog.com]

Re:Hilarious PETA response in 3... 2... 1... (2, Insightful)

nomoreunusednickname (1471615) | more than 4 years ago | (#32994668)

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

Re:Hilarious PETA response in 3... 2... 1... (1)

snookerhog (1835110) | more than 4 years ago | (#32994994)

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.

Re:Hilarious PETA response in 3... 2... 1... (1)

metlin (258108) | more than 4 years ago | (#32995278)

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.)

Furries? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32994092)

fapfapfapfapfap

I smell a trend (1)

itomato (91092) | more than 4 years ago | (#32994102)

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.

Well, at least we know what killed the squirrel. (1)

Just_Say_Duhhh (1318603) | more than 4 years ago | (#32994132)

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

There is not, and cannot be... (3, Informative)

John Hasler (414242) | more than 4 years ago | (#32994140)

...any such thing as 110 proof beer.

Re:There is not, and cannot be... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32994294)

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.

Re:There is not, and cannot be... (1)

Aboroth (1841308) | more than 4 years ago | (#32994424)

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.

Re:There is not, and cannot be... (3, Informative)

NotBornYesterday (1093817) | more than 4 years ago | (#32994566)

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.

Re:There is not, and cannot be... (1)

ThanatosMinor (1046978) | more than 4 years ago | (#32994920)

There are other methods to increase the alcohol content besides distillation. Freezing [wikipedia.org] , 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.

Re:There is not, and cannot be... (1)

John Hasler (414242) | more than 4 years ago | (#32995390)

The finished product is still considered beer.

Only by the marketing types trying to sell it.

It's still fermented; not technically distilled (1)

darthservo (942083) | more than 4 years ago | (#32995418)

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.

Re:There is not, and cannot be... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32994610)

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.

Re:There is not, and cannot be... (1)

badboy_tw2002 (524611) | more than 4 years ago | (#32994812)

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.

Re:There is not, and cannot be... (2, Informative)

bm_luethke (253362) | more than 4 years ago | (#32994756)

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

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.

Re:There is not, and cannot be... (1)

bm_luethke (253362) | more than 4 years ago | (#32994814)

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.

Re:There is not, and cannot be... (1)

BKX (5066) | more than 4 years ago | (#32995354)

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.

Re:There is not, and cannot be... (1)

Ornlu (1706502) | more than 4 years ago | (#32995400)

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".

Re:There is not, and cannot be... (1)

John Hasler (414242) | more than 4 years ago | (#32995358)

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.

Nonsense. (2, Interesting)

Chelmet (1273754) | more than 4 years ago | (#32994466)

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.

Re:Nonsense. (2, Informative)

sssssss27 (1117705) | more than 4 years ago | (#32994528)

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

Re:Nonsense. (2, Interesting)

Chelmet (1273754) | more than 4 years ago | (#32994654)

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.

Re:Nonsense. (1)

DarkKnightRadick (268025) | more than 4 years ago | (#32994588)

50% alcohol = 100 proof

Re:Nonsense. (1)

adonoman (624929) | more than 4 years ago | (#32994678)

American or European proof?

Re:Nonsense. (0, Redundant)

treeves (963993) | more than 4 years ago | (#32995394)

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

-Tim the Enchanter

Bestiality Beer (1)

theghost (156240) | more than 4 years ago | (#32994154)

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

Skunk? (2, Interesting)

rabblerabblerabble (1593117) | more than 4 years ago | (#32994172)

If they go bad will the squirrels turn into Skunks?

55%, not 110 proof (1)

loufoque (1400831) | more than 4 years ago | (#32994188)

Seriously, who uses that kind of meaningless notation anymore?

Re:55%, not 110 proof (1)

cosm (1072588) | more than 4 years ago | (#32994264)

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."

Re:55%, not 110 proof (4, Insightful)

swanzilla (1458281) | more than 4 years ago | (#32994320)

Seriously, who uses that kind of meaningless notation anymore?

Jack, Jim, Jose, et al

Re:55%, not 110 proof (1)

cosm (1072588) | more than 4 years ago | (#32994384)

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.

Re:55%, not 110 proof (1)

ElectricTurtle (1171201) | more than 4 years ago | (#32995136)

I'll drink to that!

Re:55%, not 110 proof (1)

rotide (1015173) | more than 4 years ago | (#32994446)

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.

Oh God. Rule 34 gets us again. (1)

myocardialinfarction (1606123) | more than 4 years ago | (#32994196)

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

Re:Oh God. Rule 34 gets us again. (1)

Locke2005 (849178) | more than 4 years ago | (#32994538)

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

Flavourful? (1)

oldmac31310 (1845668) | more than 4 years ago | (#32994216)

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

Freeze Distilation != Brewing... (2, Insightful)

nweaver (113078) | more than 4 years ago | (#32994224)

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.

Re:Freeze Distilation != Brewing... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32994432)

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

Re:Freeze Distilation != Brewing... (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32994724)

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

cold sensors (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32994254)

Does the squirrels nuts turn blue if cold enuff?

Disgusting (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32994362)

...and pointless.

Re:Disgusting (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32994904)

That's what she said!

Hangover? (4, Funny)

lazlo (15906) | more than 4 years ago | (#32994380)

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

Why the stuffed animals (2, Interesting)

SnarfQuest (469614) | more than 4 years ago | (#32994392)

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.

Re:Why the stuffed animals (1)

demonbug (309515) | more than 4 years ago | (#32994980)

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...

No more Paradox for me (1)

ed (79221) | more than 4 years ago | (#32994472)

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

They can go and take a running jump

Oh dear (1)

hickmott (122356) | more than 4 years ago | (#32994474)

Two girls / one squirrel, anyone?

Yet another missed opportunity (1)

Locke2005 (849178) | more than 4 years ago | (#32994500)

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

Hrm (1)

Psyko (69453) | more than 4 years ago | (#32994852)

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

Sold out (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32994992)

They are already sold out.

=(

Re:Sold out (2, Funny)

ElectricTurtle (1171201) | more than 4 years ago | (#32995028)

Ted Nugent bought them all.

Sounds like a Colbert Platinum segment... (1)

Trip6 (1184883) | more than 4 years ago | (#32995344)

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

Furries (1)

Windwraith (932426) | more than 4 years ago | (#32995382)

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

Sorry what?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?