Not just false, but demonstrating extreme ignorance of how science actually works. Confirming widely accepted models is useful, but boring. Sure, presenting a crackpot theory as an "expert witness" might be harmful to a physicist's livelihood, but demonstrating that the LHC is dangerous through solid, testable evidence (you know, that science stuff) would make a physicist's reputation.
Slashdot Mirror
Not just false, but demonstrating extreme ignorance of how science actually works. Confirming widely accepted models is useful, but boring. Sure, presenting a crackpot theory as an "expert witness" might be harmful to a physicist's livelihood, but demonstrating that the LHC is dangerous through solid, testable evidence (you know, that science stuff) would make a physicist's reputation.