What exactly does this accomplish? … and for what cause was it done…? and really, what are they really thinking this will be used for???… and if they have no idea how it will effect the globe, i.e.: weather, water, quakes etc… or the ultimate fear some scientists have– what are they doing?? Just because ‘mankind’ CAN do something doesn’t mean ‘mankind’ should do it.
Landmark experiment to unlock secrets of Big Bang could cause end of the world, say scientists in court bid to halt it. It has cost 4.4billion+ and is designed to unlock the secrets of the Big Bang.
But rather than providing vital information about the beginning of life, the world’s biggest experiment could cause the end of the world, say scientists. They fear that the Large Hadron Collider – due to be switched on in nine days’ time – will create a black hole that could swallow the planet. By smashing sub-atomic particles together at close to the speed of light, the LHC aims to recreate the conditions that existed a fraction of a second after the birth of the universe or Big Bang, shedding light on the building blocks of life.
But critics claim that the ‘time machine’, which has been built 300ft beneath the French-Swiss border near Geneva, could instead spawn a shower of mini-black holes. Within four years, one of these ‘celestial vacuums’ could have swollen to such a size that it is capable of sucking the Earth inside-out, said Otto Rossler, one of a group of scientists mounting a last-minute court challenge to the project.
They claim the experiment violates the right to life under the European Convention of Human Rights. However, the case at the European Court of Human Rights is not expected to delay the switch on, scheduled for Wednesday of next week. Professor Rossler, a German chemist, said the European Organization for Nuclear Research, or CERN, has admitted its project will create black holes but doesn’t consider them to be a risk.
He warned: ‘My own calculations have shown it is quite plausible that these little black holes survive and will grow exponentially and eat the planet from the inside. I have been calling for CERN to hold a safety conference to prove my conclusions wrong but they have not been willing.’
Those involved in the project have dismissed the claims as ‘absurd’ and insist that extensive safety assessments have found the experiment, which is funded by 20 countries, including the UK, to be safe. A report written earlier this year stated: ‘Over the past billions of years, nature has already generated on Earth as many collisions as about a million LHC experiments – and the planet still exists.’ The lifespan of any mini-black holes would be ‘very short’, it added.
CERN spokesman James Gillies said the arguments before the European Court of Human Rights had been answered in ‘extensive safety assessments’.
He told the Sunday Telegraph: ‘The Large Hadron Collider will not be producing anything that does not happen routinely in nature due to cosmic rays. If they were dangerous we would know about it already.’
Scientists have used large particle colliders to smash atoms and pieces of atoms together for 30 years, but this machine has attracted so much attention because it is the most powerful ever built. In the LHC beams of protons will be propelled through an 18-mile-long circular tunnel. More than 5,000 magnets lining the tunnel will accelerate the hundreds of billions of tiny particles to almost the speed of light, allowing them to complete one circuit in one-11,000th of a second.
There will be two beams going in opposite directions, each packing as much energy as a car traveling at 100mph. When they reach almost the speed of light, they will be smashed head on into each other, breaking them into their constituent parts, including, perhaps, the building blocks of the universe
NewScientist is running a story on an exciting new development in evolutionary biology. In short, scientists have watched a new, complex evolutionary trait develop in the lab. This mutation occurred in a population of Escherichia coli bacteria that has been in isolated development for 20 years. The evolution of these bacteria has been observed for over 44,000 generations, and has suddenly acquired the ability metabolize citrate.
Jerry Coyne, an evolutionary biologist at the University of Chicago notes: “The thing I like most is it says you can get these complex traits evolving by a combination of unlikely events,” he says. “That’s just what creationists say can’t happen.”
Steve Benen at C&L postedabout the Florida decision and caused me to think about religion and why they are so unfaltering in their objections to the word/idea: “evolution”. The south is so backwards, that many of us think that Mr Preacher Man understands more about biology and how life “evolves” than those who have studied and immersed themselves in a life’s pursuit of truth (much like they claim to be doing with Christianity).
Evolutionists aren’t necessarily anti-religion, but when people make obvious, ignorant statements about “beliefs” as opposed to actual scientific FACT (for no one can honestly claim anything within the Bible as “FACT”, with the ability to withstand the scrutiny of scientific evaluation) it really makes the Christian opponent seem idiotic.
As Steve posts, Florida has decided that schools can now use the terminology, “Scientific theory of evolution”, for the first time, in their state science standards.
How…. 21st century of them.
Florida’s State Board of Education has voted to use the term “scientific theory of evolution” in new science standards, the first time the word “evolution” has been included.
Florida’s current standards require the teaching of evolution using code words like “change over time.”
Adding the term “scientific theory” before the term “evolution” was a modified proposal at least one board member called a compromise, not standards proposed originally to the committee. The option to include “scientific theory” was made late last week.
The board narrowly passed the proposed change, voting 4-3, after more than an hour of public comment and additional discussion by the board.
Now, just how much public comment and additional discussion does it take to appease the ignorant religious with nothing but a book, over hundreds of years of scientific evaluation and “theory”? Why does one have to explain (over and over and over) what “theory” is in the scientific community?
They say, “Evolution is ONLY a theory!”
Steve answers by quoting the WSJ’s James Q. Wilson from here:
People use “theory” when they mean a guess, a faith or an idea. A theory in this sense does not state a testable relationship between two or more things. It is a belief that may be true, but its truth cannot be tested by scientific inquiry. One such theory is that God exists and intervenes in human life in ways that affect the outcome of human life. God may well exist, and He may well help people overcome problems or even (if we believe certain athletes) determine the outcome of a game. But that theory cannot be tested. There is no way anyone has found that we can prove empirically that God exists or that His action has affected some human life. If such a test could be found, the scientist who executed it would overnight become a hero.
Evolution is a theory in the scientific sense. It has been tested repeatedly by examining the remains of now-extinct creatures to see how one species has emerged to replace another. Even today we can see some kinds of evolution at work, as when scholars watch how birds on the Galapagos Islands adapt their beak size from generation to generation to the food supplies they encounter.
“Theory” in religion and “scientific theory” aren’t even in the same scope of intelligent context/evaluation. Theory in religion cannot even be tested scientifically, because all you have is the book and “belief” that the book is truth. But in science, one can test, over and over again, their ideas. They can accumulate scientific fact to evaluate and compare. It is testable… provable… within scrutiny in evaluation.
In religion all you can observe is the thoughts of humans played out in their actions based on words from a book and some internal guiding process. This can never prove/disprove God or Christianity or any other religion.
So, I find it the height of ignorance that we have leaders in congress and “high places” who put more credence in their unprovable “beliefs” over scientific fact, tested over and over to provide us with the scientific theory.
It boils down to this, believers in the Bible (or any other religious text) feel like “theories” are just ideas some one craps out of their head, perhaps while even sitting on the shitter. Theories to these folks are no more than a dream or guess or a vain imagination.
But when they try to provide their “proof” of God, their ”theory” is even far less instructive and edifying, because all they have is the book (you choose which of the many hundreds of versions is the RIGHT one) and their personal story (which is never objective or helpful, as far as theories go).
Hence, altho I am a “believer”, it is my belief and I can not honestly tell you it is truth beyond a shadow of a doubt. It is because of my personal experiences and life learned lessons. I can not scientifically prove anything. Nor do I want to try to convince you one way or the other.
But when it comes to real world science, believers must be prepared to drop their idiotic, non-supportable religious “beliefs” as if they were truth for all men and embrace what science can prove with its “scientific theories”, which are provable.
One has to take a big nasty dummy pill to swallow the whole Christianity thing, when making it more “real” than science. But, somehow, the south especially, has taken the entire brain dead potion than the rest of the country, if you want all thinking people to go along with you… much like the Taliban insists in the ME.
Don’t expect this thinking man to just go along with those who are obviously lost, just because they use scare tactics to try to keep us (and successfully with most of you) in line.
Wake Up, Rednecks!