Excel: The Glass Is January 2

Behold the ultimate mic drop for anyone claiming they're "vaccine educated" after watching three YouTube videos! This quiz is basically immunology's version of "tell me you slept through biology without telling me you slept through biology." The questions cover complex immunological concepts like lymphocyte identification, antibody chain responses (IgM is first, by the way), toll-like receptors, cytokine functions, and T-cell maturation pathways. Meanwhile, the average anti-vaxxer's "research" consists of Facebook posts from that one relative who thinks essential oils cure everything. The savage punchline at the bottom perfectly captures the disconnect between actual scientific research and "I read something on a blog once." Next time someone says they've "done their research" on vaccines, maybe hand them this pop quiz and watch the panic set in faster than an immune response to a foreign antigen!

Neutrinos: the chaotic gremlins of particle physics! First they're massless, then they have mass, then they're breaking cosmic speed limits, then—oops, just kidding! But wait, now they have NEGATIVE mass? And IMAGINARY mass?? These ghostly little particles are basically the teenagers of the Standard Model—refusing to follow rules and constantly changing their identity. Physicists worldwide are tearing their hair out while neutrinos are somewhere in the universe giggling at our confusion. The ultimate cosmic pranksters!

Linear scale enthusiast spotted in the wild! The stick figure needs approximately 1.6 kilometers of paper to properly display uranium's energy density (76,000,000 MJ/kg) alongside sugar (19 MJ/kg). That's what we call dedication to visual accuracy. Next time your grant proposal gets rejected, just explain you needed funding for a paper roll the length of Manhattan to make your graph "properly." Real scientists don't compress data—they just build bigger offices.

The scientific method's greatest nemesis: confirmation bias wearing a skeptic's costume! This meme brilliantly dissects the difference between healthy scientific inquiry and that one lab partner who keeps rejecting your results because they "just feel wrong." Contrarian doubt is basically the flat-earther of the research world—stubbornly clinging to suspicions despite mountains of peer-reviewed evidence. Scientists have been mentally tapping this sign since Galileo dropped objects from the Leaning Tower of Pisa and someone probably said "yeah but what if gravity is just, like, your opinion, man?"

Choosing your thesis committee is basically academic Russian roulette. You've got nine brilliant minds here, but only one will actually defend your work while the rest sit in judgment, picking apart four years of your life with questions like "Have you considered [obvious thing you dismissed in chapter 2]?" The real challenge isn't writing 200 pages on obscure knowledge that three people will read—it's surviving a room of professors who've forgotten what it's like to be sleep-deprived and surviving on ramen. Choose the wrong committee member and you'll be doing "minor revisions" until retirement age. Pro tip: pick the one who naps during faculty meetings. They'll sign anything to get back to their afternoon coffee.

The perfect answer to "Why take ethics?" delivered in real-time by the universe itself! Nothing says "this is why we need ethical oversight in tech" quite like a 65% mortality rate in animal testing. Turns out those pesky humanities requirements aren't just professors torturing STEM majors with reading assignments—they're trying to prevent you from torturing actual test subjects later. Maybe spending a semester contemplating the trolley problem isn't so useless when you're literally implanting computer chips into living brains. Who knew?