anon18 comments on Horrible LHC Inconsistency - Less Wrong

17 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 22 September 2008 03:12AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (32)

Sort By: Old

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: anon18 27 September 2008 07:36:12AM 1 point [-]

1e-6? You claim to be rationalists who project an expected 6 million deaths or a one in a million chance of losing all human potential forever. I assume this is enough motivation to gather some evidence, or at least read the official LHC safety report.

What overwhelming evidence or glaring flaws in their arguments leaves you convinced at 1e-6 that the LHC is an existential risk?