They dress like they are from another planet *roll eyes* who though socks and sandals were good!
Some can be really insensitive, and lacking social skills. I think being really thick skinned is a way of coping with such a competitive, challenging environment.

I'm not sure how I can help as I only know about the UK, and I'm in a couple, but no-one has answered.
I've heard that in the US there are longer hours and they take it more seriously, our lab goes early to the pub quite a bit. Here you would get out of the PhD what you put in, it's your work so it's up to you how you approach it unless your supervisor is very controlling.
I think it's longer to complete a PhD in the US, but there is no viva at the end. I think it might be earlier on(?)

Can you rotate in the lab? It might give you an idea. Do you have any other options for PhDs, did you want to do one before being asked? Maybe seeing more options would put it into perspective better?
Some people are quite thick skinned and will just get through their PhD whatever happens. I on the other hand found my supervisor's attitude to be a problem. There's no right or wrong answer. There do seem to be conflicting signals from supervisor/students.

Have you been on a GRADschool course, or looked in the new wave website for careers ideas? See the prospects planner too.

Do you have a positive and negative control?
At this point your supervisor does need to give you help on analysing the results if he expects you to interpret it his way, as you've no time to repeat if you're writing up(?)
Maybe you should talk to someone else senior, to see if they can find a potential problem or explain how it still fits your supervisor's theory.
If they couldn't find a problem, maybe they could help you defend it to your supervisor.
maybe the route is to say this evidence disputes the theory that....but more investigation is needed e.g. x and y and factors could have influenced the result or experiments a and b should be done in the future to test this further. The experiments could be right, but just don't support for theory for some obscure reason and may be just be an exception. There could be some secret ingredient in your chemicals that throws off the result and makes it an exeption.

The advice I got from a young lecturer was that you don't need publications to do a PhD or apply for postdocs.

I might be a bit wary, but I've had bad experiences with my supervisor. He's someone that is not around a lot, leaves you to it and fails to read work without a lot of pressure. Is it his students that have given you the information above? I'd at least think about whether you could cope with 3-4 years of the above, and whether you want more hands on or distant supervision. Some people advise that the supervisor is the most important thing to get right in a PhD, but it is up to you. The enthusiasm is a good sign if he is always like that, you may need someone to motivate you when it gets tough-but again different students need different motivation.
Age should be irrelevent apart from maybe extra responsibilities and your "peers" being younger. Lack of experience could be OK if there is lots of help for you and you are not just left to it. Younger supervisors can be good as have a lot more time than more senior academics.

Motivational stories...
My Head of department apparently wrote up in 6 weeks because he got money for reaching the deadline.

If they're the helpful type, supervisors/advisors should be good at finding you a good one, or even postdocs. I found all mine by word of mouth.

Is it a suggested guide? I was on a committee and we voted in a 60 000 limit for Pure Science, but only as we were the only faculty without a limit. It was supposed to be approximate. You could contact your faculty to ask maybe. There's always things like appendices and tables to cut down limits too

Blocks of concentrated writing e.g. a week to get to a target working really efficiently.
Not going on the Internet.... or taking breaks all the time....

I love your username, although I really want some banana cake now

I know someone who did Physics/Molecular Biology. I would expect it to be a struggle as he didn't have any background in Molecular Biology and had to learn the labwork from scratch. It depends how much emphasis there is on each department, e.g. is it just a year or a short project in one department. Could mean more work as widens what you need to know. Also whether the supervisors are going to really care about your progress and make sure you learn everything and not just leave you to it. I know someone else with supervisors at different unis, who did his 1st year in our lab, then finished at the other lab (similar departments). He did fantastically well in his 1st year (jammy), but his other supervisor was really unpleasant. He's finished and has a job in a brewery now(jammy).
There is the view that subjects have more cross-over now, and the different approaches give a new angle that no-one would have found otherwise.

It can take 6 months to find a job. It depends on the job though. What year are you in, and at what stage of funding? It depends how much money you have to live off. Some people finish while doing a job, particularly starting a postdoc, but some jobs can stop people finishing or drag it out. If you'd got most of it done I'd definately get a job. Before then it's really financial. I've been living off an overdraft and my partner for most of this year. I got £240 from a 1 week temp job recently, so maybe short term work would allow you to get by. You can possibly claim jobseekers allowance/benefits if you are actively searching, I wasn't eligible

I was a geek and met up with people from another forum, and saw Harry Potter and transformers at the cinema. I spent most of Sunday asleep!

Whisky?!
How are you feeling phder? I went very stressed last weekend, but more moody. I have 2 tests for jobs on top of a PhD and really can't take my mind off it.