Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuart van Onselen
I, too, am deeply offended by physmoon's attitude, but as (s)he, by his/her own admission, doesn't actually know what (s)he's talking about, I guess I should just ignore it, like I would the whining of a little child.
|
I believe this is what was said:-
Quote:
Originally Posted by physmoon
What I find disturbing here is how so called 'intelligent thinkers' not only dismiss legitimate safety concerns. But ridicule those who dare to question whether or not these scientist can be trusted. The less one knows about this subject the more legitimate the concerns become as they cannot be understood. The argument then comes down to the trust of a few people. being not a history student dosn't disqualify me from knowing the track record of mankind when it comes to business. (and this endeavour is as much business as science)
|
The top scientists running the project are on record as saying they would not be surprised if two red dragons popped out of the experiment. On the one hand the LHC project is being promoted as being completely safe by those most academically qualified to guarantee the safety aspects at CERN and on the other that it will produce unknown results.
I have been on a number of forums and I realize that it may be frustrating to the scientific community to constantly deal with public concerns but I can politely assure you that some individuals do not respond with confidence to a put down even if it is from someone highly academically qualified.
This experiment is entirely in the hands of the scientific community which has guaranteed the safety aspect and in my case at least a nervous member of the public praying to God that we do not get hurt in the search for the God Particle. What I am saying is I understand the communication between peers takes a certain adversarial format. That same adversarial format may quieten the non scientist by intimidation but it is not a good way to allay fears.
Michael