It activates the same chemicals in your brain as cocaine! 
Well, yeah, there are only ~~three~~^[@Neuromancer49@midwest.social corrected me] a few neurotransmitters. That's not saying much.
You know what else activates those chemicals? Practically everything. When scientists breed "knockout" mice without dopamine, the mice just stand there until they die of thirst, because there is no reward for.... living.
It contains more germs than a toilet seat! 
Germs like moist surfaces. We don't want germs on our toilets, which is why we make them out of porcelain, which is hard, dry, non-porous, and easy to clean.
If it had more germs than your colon, then I would be concerned.
usually they have at least 2-3 plausible theories, and they just can't make or design an experiment which will eliminate the wrong ones. Moreover, even having one theory doesn't mean they know-know (tm) something, at least not in the sense of knowing the truth, they have a model which fits all the currently known outcomes/experiments, which might be the truth. It creates distorted image of scientific knowledge as something absolute, which seemingly implodes every century, instead of a process
(e.g. maxwell derived his equations thinking aether was an actually existing thing (and the equations reflect it), the equations are still fucking stellar 150 years later, aether was thrown out in 50)
*obviously, one can take this to absurdity by saying science doesn't know shit, let me roll coal or whatever the fuck, but i still think nuanced understanding of science would be more positive, with having gradations of "not knowing" and "knowing" over both ontological truth and predictive truth, while the former is elusive and slowly approaching reality (in some philosophies), the latter is likely in firmly "knowing" category
also scientists basically love it when current science can't explain something bc it means they can debate and design experiments and try to coax out new theories of how the world works. like the Hubble tension. Dumbasses will be like "omg arrogant scientists are ignoring this huge hole in their theory about the origin of the universe", but actually most cosmologists would be sorely disappointed if it turns out their current theories of the Big Bang can explain it after all and there isn't new physics to be discovered there.
Irks me, too. It's life changing if you figure out those "holes" in existing theories. Einstein did it when quantum physics replaced Newtonian physics, which was already a major accomplishment. That's why everyone on the planet knows who Einstein and Newton are. It's the holy grail of science to find such concrete answers.
Some chud will think he's smarter than people doing actual research because they're willing to say "I don't know. Nobody does." You see this a lot with evolutionary biology and climate science.
The history of mathematics and later physics is insane because you have some very complicated thing being discovered in 1500 when nobody knew about boiling the water before drinking it else death because Pasteur is from the late 1800
i do think they knew about boiling water, but mainly they've had beer which preserves without sealed off containers; and modern surgery (with accompanying sterilization) was invented due to mass armies, i think?
The doctor who realized washing their hands between surgeries was a good idea probably got to watch television
Seems wiki (at least) attributes it to lister in 1860s roughly, so might have dodged tv, but probably caught radio (died in 1912)
(Could have been a podcaster bro, can’t know that)