The cocktail I had with dinner was delicious, but I honestly wish it didn't have the effects of alcohol because now instead of making good use of my evening I'm just a bit sleepy and unmotivated. You're getting pretty far off into the weeds insisting that the primary reason to drink anything with a drop of alcohol in it is the alcohol.
>If they can't tell a difference what hope does the average consumer have?
What kind of students were they? Were they just starting off? How good was the program they were in? How do they compare to professionals?
If you _intended_ to make a study to prove your point that wine critics are full of shit, you'd pick the most incompetent wine critics possible. It's pretty solidly true that olfactory senses don't translate into language very well. I can experience really complex flavors and smells but it's more or less impossible for me to share them with words in any way that could actually communicate the flavor to others. If I studied flavor and the language to describe it extensively, I might be able to communicate a flavor to another similarly studied person, but that's about it.
Experience of flavor is wholly separate from being able to describe it. And students who are leaning to are _more_ apt to invent flavor descriptions based on what they think is expected. It's pretty easy to trick people, especially by putting them in an environment tailored to deceive. You could draw more conclusions about the ability of suggestion to affect perception than you can about why people drink wine.
That is my point entirely. They may prefer better tasting wine, but taste is a secondary factor to the effects.
>Proving students aren't very good at describing flavor or detecting tricks doesn't prove your point.
oenology (wine studies) students, If they can't tell a difference what hope does the average consumer have?
All that said, enjoy it. We all have vices. Just don't pretend you are somehow better than the guy drinking ripple on his porch.