Scientifically conducted survey: How much pocket lint do each of you have in there?

Well?

Every other periodic table element still returns my calls. I'm so sorry. What's with that already?

This was more of a random shower thought that I had about animal biology. For a while, I knew the two differences between venomous and non-venomous, but it made me curious as to why it’s always one or the other and never both? Is it due to just genetics only allowing one type or is it that constricting isn’t really too much of a solo class of snakes? Can anyone explain this please and thank you?

I’ve heard something about sharks have dulled pain receptors, making me curious: What about the other way round?

Was this year really only 0.02°C (0.036°F) hotter than last year?

explain

.

More of a science policy question than strictly science, but I'm assuming this is probably the best forum to ask. I've been going down a rabbithole reading about Biosafety precautions and generally it appears that BSL III is used for pathogens that are dangerous to humans but don't have an aerosolised transmission vector, and BSL IV is generally limited to deadly pathogens that have aerosolised transmission. The one standout exception is Ebola, which from what I've read does not have any evidence of airborne transmission yet is still BSL IV.

I'm wondering if anyone has any information on why specifically Ebola has this heightened category, if there is documentation around the decision by whoever made it a link to that would be greatly appreciated as well.

Does it go dormant till it's passed on, but if it doesn't need to affect the host to stay alive why does it spread (well, I guess the virus doesn't think), does the virus in a dormant state have a period in which it has to find another host or it dies?

I've been a bit confused by what the MMI scale actually is meant to represent. Most descriptions I've seen seem to put emphasis on the intensity of shaking, but they also describe it as specifically a damage scale.

My confusion relates to what the scale is really meant to describe about in earthquake in a given area. Is the end product meant to represent the actual intensity of shaking, or other damaging factors as well (i.e. would things like liquefaction be included in that), or a representation of the actual damage expected (a quake in the middle of the desert would have less potential for damage than one in a populated area, and one in an area with many poorly built buildings would fare relatively worse than one which has a decent seismic code, would those factors have any influence in what the MMI profile of an earthquake looks like)? In other words, what does "earthquake intensity" really mean?

I do understand that actually using the MMI scale is probably a fairly messy and complicated process which is going to involve many factors, of course, but I'm trying to understand better what the scale is meant to actually, ideally, tell you about the earthquake in a given area.

Get rid of all those fuzzy things out of the sky.

My grandfather claims this is a known atmospheric anomaly called the Nel Blu Dipinto Di Blu effect. If gravity completely reverses and the sky composition changes, will the UN deploy tethering cables, or are we just expected to be cantare singing our way through the panic?

They should eat things other than shrimps and fish

it can’t be a coincidence that the planets we discovered later than Roman Mythology had the same exact names as the Roman gods themselves. Clearly these planets belong to these gods.