A suggestion ( seems reasonable and sensible to me at least) , to answer your question “What exactly has to be done to convince the fear mongers that the LHC is safe?? There are already detailed, peer reviewed studies and hundreds (thousands?) of published papers on black holes at the LHC by reputable scientists from all over the world, none of which indicate any danger whatsoever.” is you write your views to the address of service on the filing documents and advice the plaintiffs in US District Court in Hawaii. The address seen is Luis Sancho , PO Box 411, Honomu , HI 96728 or call 808 – 964- 5535 . You could even persuade the peers you mentioned to put in an amicus curia brief to support the DOE and other defendants and oppose the plaintiff. A sample of an amicus curia brief was when many Nobel Laureates put in their views on the creation science issue in Edward v Anguillard US Supreme Court some 20 years ago.

Walter Wagner’s http://www.lhcdefense.org/pdf/Sancho%20v%20Doe%20-%20Affidavit%20of%20Walter%20L.%20Wagner%20in%20Support%20of%20TRO.pdf

Those who allowed the discussion too have discharged that duty. Those who are enthused and happy with the long wait of two decades to see the first trial run of the beam as well as those who shun the concerns may hold dear to their hearts the quest for the holy grail of science in LHC and seek to benefit us with the future findings of science, discharging their duty as scientists to push further the frontiers of unknown to known. Each have their place, and collectively as one we have come that long journey from thousands of years to now, and from now to our future.

(It takes a scientist to read those views expressed by other scientists. I am no scientist. Peace. )

First, I’m neither a crackpot nor AFAIK was I presenting a joke I think people have heard very much, and I didn’t see it here at all. I directly said I don’t think EOTW theories were right, just commenting on the presentation of the issue vis-à-vis media and blog discussion combined with the most powerful collisions not having been done yet. The one physicist’s remarks about “four years” were perhaps culturally interesting due to connection to new age mythology, and I would add now: maybe the US Presidential election as well, heh. BTW one of your commenters came up with or repeated a cute term, “con-CERN troll” for those worried about such things. I certainly think most readers here could be interested in my link to comparing with the earlier controversy about the first atomic explosion on earth. I believe that was a real worry at the time.

I haven’t seen hardly any jokes about us really surviving the LHC despite most multiple universes being destroyed, and Google provides a very few hits – but maybe I missed something. It certainly is a cute (?) dig at the glib acceptance of the quantum multiverse concept, perhaps worth doubting it in serious terms as a problem for how to engage scientific method etc. if we aren’t continuing along a unique track of events, as I have noted elsewhere.

Finally, I did ask some real questions here (strangeness, ion collisions) and heard nothing, so I figured I might as well have some fun if that’s the best I can get from being serious … Folks, must you be so neurotic about comment conformity? Nevertheless I will follow a more reserved practice in the future.

Crackpots not welcome. And seriously, folks — black-hole/world-ending jokes are only funny the first million times.

is confusing?