The issue is about credibility, I argue CERN's credibility is lacking.

CERN directs its own scientists to not discuss risk probabilities and arrogantly denigrates the credibility of the opposition.

Who are some of the more notable concerned scientists?

Visiting professor of Physics Dr. Rossler is famous for his contributions to Chaos theory and founding of Endophysics.

Senior Physics PHD Dr. Rainer Plaga also wrote a paper concluding CERN has failed to prove safety. Dr. Plaga proposes CERN SLOW DOWN and implement feasible risk reduction methods.

Former cosmic ray researcher, California math champion and Nuclear Safety Officer Walter L. Wagner discovered flaws with CERN's safety arguments. He calculates stable strange matter creation (particularly from Lead Lead collisions) and dangerous micro black hole creation has not been excluded and might as likely prove catastrophic.

Am I concerned. Yes.

Do I think CERN is arrogant, reckless and misrepresents safety. Yes.

LHCFacts.org

Have you read CERNs SPC Committee's Safety Report disclaimer?

"this argument relies on properties of cosmic rays and neutrinos that, while highly plausible, do require confirmation" (indico.cern.ch/getFile.py/access?contribId=20&resId=0&materialId=0&confId=35065)

So... Dr. Rosser might still be correct: "...after 50 months the earth to a centimeter would have shrunk"

Awesome video on YouTube "You Prefer Your Collider": youtube.com/watch?v=A1L2xODZSI4

More at LHCFacts.org

Have you read CERN's SPC Committee's LSAG report disclaimer?

"this argument relies on properties of cosmic rays and neutrinos that, while highly plausible, do require confirmation, as can be expected in the coming years."

So Dr. Otto Rossler's theory might still be correct? "...after 50 months the earth to a centimeter would have shrunk."

LHCFacts.org

Cosmological observations provide an incredibly rich set of clues to the pre-big bang universe. Do you see any flaws in: The Pre-Big Bang Universe at BigCrash.org?

… In the beginning (in the pre-big bang universe) there was only the vast vacuum of space and time. But this vacuum was not sterile, it was seething with vacuum energy. This vacuum energy field permeates and defines the universe, an astronomically large sphere of energy. And just as matter generates gravity by warping space and time, so does energy and this is the force that defines the size and shape of the universe, and also the force that bestows mass on matter…

…When a virtual matter/anti-matter pair becomes a matter matter pair, the virtual particles are no longer able to mutually annihilate and they become real, stealing energy from the vacuum energy of space. This is the mechanism of slow matter creation in the first phase of the pre-big bang universe. Over perhaps a billion billion years, clouds of matter form over the entire universe, and eventually coalesce into cosmological bodies and eventually the first pre-big bang black hole, which starts the second phase of the pre-big bang universe, fast accretion of matter from vacuum energy by black holes…

CERNs web site states that we have not been destroyed by effects of cosmic rays and micro black holes will evaporate.

However, cosmic rays travel too fast to be captured by Earths gravity, while collider particles smash head on like car collisions and can be captured by Earths gravity. Einsteins highly successful relativity theory predicts that micro black holes will not decay but instead only grow, and Hawking Radiation is an unproven and disputed theory that contradicts relativity.

There is currently no reasonable proof of LHC safety, LSAG (LHC Safety Assessment Group) has been trying for months to prove safety without success. However science may still be a few years away from being able to prove safety or not.

Professor Dr. Otto E. Roessler has given interviews and lectures in Europe warning of a very real danger to the planet from the Large Hadron Collider.

If this experiment is so safe, why arent CERN scientists allowed to express any personal fears they might have about this Collider?

Alleged in the legal action: Chief Scientific Officer, Mr. Engelen passed an internal memorandum to workers at CERN, asking them, regardless of personal opinion, to affirm in all interviews that there were no risks involved in the experiments, changing the previous assertion of minimal risk. (Statisticians generally consider minimal risk as 1-10%).

Which would more wise, conduct a full and independent adversarial safety study first, or just turn it on now and see what happens?

JTankers
LHCConcerns.com