O statistika ir mokslininkai sakys „tuštybė“.

http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2013/jun/23/wine-tasting-junk-science-analysis
In 2011 Professor Richard Wiseman 
<http://psydb.herts.ac.uk/staff_list/FMPro?-db=staff_list_email&-format=recorddetail.html&-lay=details&-sortfield=surname&-max=2147483647&-recid=33579&-findall>, 
a psychologist (and former professional magician) at Hertfordshire 
University invited 578 people to comment on a range of red and white 
wines 
<http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2011/apr/14/expensive-wine-cheap-plonk-taste>, 
varying from £3.49 for a claret to £30 for champagne, and tasted blind.

People could tell the difference between wines under £5 and those above 
£10 only 53% of the time for whites and only 47% of the time for reds. 
Overall they would have been just as a successful flipping a coin 
<http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2011/apr/14/expensive-wine-cheap-plonk-taste> 
to guess.

Arba čia: 
http://scienceblogs.com/cortex/2007/11/02/the-subjectivity-of-wine/
In 2001, Frederic Brochet, of the University of Bordeaux, conducted two 
separate and very mischievous experiments. In the first test, Brochet 
invited 57 wine experts and asked them to give their impressions of what 
looked like two glasses of red and white wine. The wines were actually 
the same white wine, one of which had been tinted red with food 
coloring. But that didn’t stop the experts from describing the “red” 
wine in language typically used to describe red wines. One expert 
praised its “jamminess,” while another enjoyed its “crushed red fruit.” 
Not a single one noticed it was actually a white wine.


2016.01.10 02:43, Bronco rašė:
> Kas nemėgsta ir nesupranta vyno, sakys, koks skirtumas, visi jie rugštybė