The mouse escaped before it returned, so it could be smart enough to reason that if it survived one attempt, it would survive another. To test if a mouse would return to a fatal trap, the mouse would actually have to be killed that first time through, causing some real issues in completing the experiment. The mouse…

“Free iPhone 6! walk across this ramp - really, Its all you have to do!”

That’s why cats quickly became man’s sort-of-friend when we started living in cities.

Yer missin’ the point. The funnel system is designed as a “catch and release” trap. while drowning is supposed to induce euphoria.

Having lived in the country for almost 30 years I can assure you it’s nearly impossible to make any structure 100% mouse proof. They can fit into holes as small as a dime and do not only enter areas for food, they also do for shelter and when seeking out material for their den.

Have you seen some of the work he did while at Blackberry? Very interesting test rigs!The interval timing device he made for this is a nice piece of work in itself. It could be easily outmatched by a simple microcontroller now, but wouldnt be nearly as fun.

Darwinism not quite at its finest.

To be fair humans are just as dumb, I bet I could build a larger but similar trap and replace the food with 100$ bills, or electronics of some type, and trap as many humans as I wanted.

How dumb? I think he actually learned how smart they are.

No, it proves mice are tenacious, curious, and smart. The mouse found out it could get out of the bucket, so it was worth the effort to go back and try to get the bait. You can see the mouse approaches the problem differently each time. Unlike Wile E. Coyote, it worked on it plan over several iterations.

Haha i love matthias- he’s an amazing woodworker who builds all his own tools- from a bandsaw mill to a table saw to an air raid siren. If you’re into woodworking, definitely follow his channel- he’s brilliant.

As much as folks bitch about the inefficiencies of NASA they do a whole lot better job than the USAF in terms of bang for the buck.

The policy was called Mutual Assured Destruction, the only defense against nuclear weapons. It is still in effect today.

You do realize that “harmful” depends massively on dosage and contact route?

But one study did find that methylparaben can interfere with the effectiveness of breast cancer drugs. There’s evidence that the chemical finds ways to “bypass” tamoxifen, one of the most common breast cancer drugs.

I’m all for making people aware of product safety. But one study showing a potential link is not good enough. There need to be several studies that are able to show the same results. Using one study is how alarmists twist facts.

Today’s misplaced concern is brought to you by the letter B, for “Bioavailability”

My favorite Effie Brown story:

No, I think you’re just, you know, in touch with reality. There is no other time period that would be better to live in, for women at least. It’s like that Louis CK joke - white men can go to ANY time period and be like “Woo fun!” but it will suck tremendously for literally everyone else.

Am I the only one who gets really annoyed at people who think you should only play new games? For the same reason people avoid getting consoles like the PS3 or Xbox 360 because the consoles lifespan is nearly over, not realising that the games are so much cheaper and there are so much more of them.