Quote:
Originally Posted by Warren Platts
I saw this earlier and have been meaning to respond to it: Actually, there is no point where big science can just decide to go forward. Substitute the word "oil" for "science" and you'll see what I mean. No doubt Exxon had "addressed concerns" before the Valdez oil spill. Just as big oil must undergo strict review by governental agencies, including the courts, if need be, similarly, big science must also be subject to formal governmental review.
|
Sure, every time an oil company, for example (at least in the US) builds a new refinery, they have to go to the appropriate agencies (more often state and local than federal) and get the appropriate air and water and other permits. And there are even mechanisms for others to appeal those permits and ask them to be reviewed, all the way up to the courts.
But my point was that there was some end to that process. Once you've asked the EPA to review, then asked the courts to review, you can't keep doing a never ending "questioning" of the permits, so as to hold them up forever.
So, what I said was:
Quote:
|
At what point do the questions turn from a critical analysis to just questioning for the sake for questioning and holding up progress (I'm not saying that has happened, I'm just asking)? Is there a point where big science can go "We have addressed your concerns, let's move forward"?
|
So, I'm asking you Warren, what would be the endpoint (if any) for you? Is there a possible point where you would be satisfied that the LHC is safe? Or have you concluded it is not, no matter what else is presented.
Quote:
The reason the LHC safety has not been reviewed is not because the LHC is safe, but because the threat it potentially poses is wholly unprecedented.
Well, there was the worry that the first atom bomb would ignite the atmosphere (and the atmosphere can ignite--it happened during the K-T mass extinction event). And like their atomic forbears, the CERN people are seeking to make the LHC a fait accompli.
|
But the LHC has been reviewed.
I assume the indented bit is a quote - could you give the source?
And the bit about the first atom bomb igniting the atmosphere has been discussed multiple times, it never was a serious concern, and it was in fact reviewed very carefully.