Site menu:

UN COMMUNICATION ConCERNed International


The first attempt of a submission of this complaint at the UN Human Rights Committee was rejected because of some preconditions concerning jurisdiction. But, especially concerning the most important point mentioned by the Committee, the situation is different now. Nevertheless, critics try to get in constructive dialogue with CERN and the member states about LHC risks, which of course would be the most direct way to improve safety. Surely, the best would be if law suits were not necessary.

Please take look at the current two papers on top of the main site: Home

————————————————————————-

Nov 20 2009: Official Press release of “ConCERNed International”

 Today, an international group of critics and experts filed a complaint at the Human Rights Committee of the United Nations at Geneva concerning risks and dangers of the planned experiments at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) operated by the European Organization of Nuclear Research (CERN) in Switzerland. The group impeaches the CERN member states, especially Switzerland, France and Germany, for not having carried out their legal responsibilities to ensure citizens’ safety.

Download Press release:  Press release UN Communication ConCERNed International

Communiqué de Presse:  Communiqué de Presse ConCERNed International

UN-Communication (Complaint) at the Human Rights Committee of the United Nations in Geneva of “ConCERNed International” against CERN member states for not ensuring citizens’ safety:

UN Communication CERN LHC ConCERNed International_on-line version 1.1

Please take a closer look at this important paper including a detailed physical part describing the scientific discourse but also having a general and very profound approach to the topic with clear suggestions to improve safety and to urgently set new standards in high energy particle collider risk evaluation with many critical quotes of well known scientists from different disciplines, including physicists, astronomers, risk researchers, philosophers and legal experts.               

www.concerned-international.com                     www.LHC-concern.info

conCERNed international         LHC-Critique

Official press release - November 20 2009

For immediate release:

CERN / LHC: Human rights complaint filed today.

Big bang machine prepared to restart Saturday.

Today, an international group of critics and experts filed a complaint at the Human Rights Committee of the United Nations at Geneva concerning risks and dangers of the planned experiments at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) operated by the European Organization of Nuclear Research (CERN) in Switzerland. The group impeaches the CERN member states, especially Switzerland, France and Germany, for not having carried out their legal responsibilities to keep citizens safe.

After a year of repairs and redesign of some LHC safety systems due to a massive equipment failure, the LHC might be prepared to inject circulating beams as soon as Saturday 0 hour this week. First beam collisions at injection energies are planned to follow shortly afterwards.

 The comprehensive and detailed communication to the UN was worked out by well-known critics and experts, relying upon the work of specialists on black holes, cosmic rays, particle physics and on risk researchers and several experts in international law. The communication clearly demonstrates concrete dangers arising from the planned high-energy experiments at the LHC and weaknesses in CERN safety assessments.

To guarantee safety, the complaint demands an external risk evaluation done by those without ties to CERN. Further, closer study of  cosmic ray (AUGER observatory) and other recent empirical data highly relevant for the LHC-safety arguments is urgently requested, as is  awaiting upcoming observing experiments in the atmosphere.

The legal aspects focus on  the special responsibility of Switzerland, France and Germany (by territory as ownership principle and CERN-council membership) and addresses also the other CERN member states not having insured LHC-safety on life and environment according to Art. 2, 6 and 17 of the International Protocol of Civil and Political Rights of the United Nations.

This complaint is supported by several organizations and a wide group of international critics of the planned “big bang experiment”. It includes a clear and detailed  description of the scientific discourse on several risks and dangers arising from the artifical and extreme states of matter planned to be created, such as risks from “micro black holes” and “strangelets” as described in a number of studies - and even dangers of transitions in the energy level of space.

Enclosed are critical studies of the method used in the CERN risk studies, one from members of the “Future of Humanity Institute” of the University of Oxford and a review on the LHC safety assessment process by risk assesment expert and ethicist Dr. Mark Leggett concluding that CERN at this date has fulfilled not more than a fifth of the necessary criteria expected for a modern safety study.

As long as there is no clear evidence that the possible production of “micro black holes” (expected to be created  by many CERN scientists) pose neither long- nor short-term danger to life and to planet Earth, CERN and the member states should not aim for their production in high energy experiments at all. Instead, it has first to be demonstrated by observation and empirical tests, 1.: that the comparison of natural events in the atmosphere to the experiments at the LHC (as proclaimed by CERN) is legitimate in all necessary respects and 2.: that the possible mass production of micro black holes at particle colliders (as regarded possible by CERN) is clearly and 100% harmless. Several ongoing and planned experiments (Earth based and in the atmosphere) on high energetic cosmic rays are expected to throw light on these questions.

Thus, as long as the credentials of a safe operation of the big bang machine are not provided, no high energy collisions should be conducted at the LHC.

If necessary, also a claim for interim measures at the UN could follow.

Finally, the operation and planning of high energy colliders should be controlled and regulated by an agency similar to the International Atomic Energy Agency at the UN or directly established at the IAEA as soon as possible.

After a year of costly repairs following a massive accident, CERN may introduce beams again as soon as this weekend with no advance announcement unlike last year’s fanfare. Experiments (beam collisions) are planned for the following weeks, with increasing  energies - intended to break a questionable ‘world record’ until Christmas. Maximum design capacities are planned to be conducted after further technical adjustments next year.

conCERNed international” consists of different organizations and inividuals having established this complaint and consists of or is in direct contact with the most well known critics of the LHC project such as Prof. Otto Roessler, Dr. Walter Wagner and many others. The complaint provides many critical views of highly reputated independent experts from different fields, including physicists, astrophysicists, risk researchers, philosophers and legal experts.

The UN-complaint is now published here:

www.concerned-international.com              www.LHC-concern.info

Contacts / Requests:

USA:

James Blodgett MA, MBA, MS

Email: Blodgett {at} risk-evaluation-forum(.)org

Phone: (001) 518-641-2279

www.concerned-international.com

Europe:

Markus Goritschnig MA

Spokesman “LHC Critique” (LHC Kritik)

Phone: +43 650 629 627 5

E-Mail: info {at} LHC-concern(.)info

www.LHC-concern.info

———————————————————————————

www.LHC-concern.info | www.global-risk-sig.org | www.lhcfacts.org | www.risk-evaluation-forum.org | www.concerned-international.com

Communiqué de Presse
Press Release
<conCERNed international>
23 Novembre 2009

Pour publication immédiate
CERN / LHC: Plainte pour violation des droits de l’homme déposée

Le 20 Novembre 2009, un groupe international de critiques et d’experts a déposé une plainte au Comité des droits de l’homme des Nations Unies à Genève concernant les risques et les dangers des expériences prévues au ‘Large Hadron Collider’ (LHC), géré par l’Organisation Européenne de Recherche Nucléaire (CERN) en Suisse (Genève). Le groupe met en doute les Etats membres du CERN, notamment la Suisse, la France et l’Allemagne, pour ne pas avoir procédé à leurs responsabilités légales pour assurer la sécurité des citoyens.

La communication complète et détaillée à l’ONU a été élaboré par des critiques et d’experts, s’appuyant sur les travaux des spécialistes sur les trous noirs, rayons cosmiques, de la physique des particules et sur les chercheurs des risques et de plusieurs experts en droit international. La communication montre clairement les dangers concrets découlant des expériences prévues a haute énergie au LHC et les faiblesses dans les évaluations de sécurité du CERN.

Pour garantir la sécurité, la plainte exige une évaluation des risques externes effectués par des personnes sans liens avec le CERN. En outre, des études plus approfondie des rayons cosmiques (p.ex. l’observatoire Auger) et d’autres récentes données empiriques très pertinents pour les arguments de sécurité du LHC est instamment demandé ainsi que attendre que les expériences observatoires dans l’atmosphère à venir.

Additionnellement on doit evaluer sur perspectives différentes des calculations concrètes et des theories discutés actuellement entre des expertes concernant des risques graves régionales et possiblement globales.

Les aspects juridiques mettent l’accent sur la responsabilité particulière de la Suisse, de la France et de l’Allemagne (par principe de territoire et d’appropriation et par adhésion au conseil du CERN), et abordent aussi les autres États membres du CERN de ne pas avoir assuré la sécurité du LHC sur la vie et l’environnement conformément à l’art. 2, 6 et 17 du Pacte international relatif aux droits civils et politiques des Nations Unies.

Cette plainte est appuyée par plusieurs organisations et un large groupe de critiques internationaux de l’expérience ‘Big Bang’ planifié. Il comprend une description claire et détaillée du discours scientifique sur plusieurs risques et les dangers résultant des états artificiels et extrêmes de la matière qui devrait être créé, comme les risques de “micro-trous noirs” et “strangelets” comme décrit dans un certain nombre d’études - et même les dangers de transitions dans le niveau d’énergie de l’espace.

En annexe de la plainte se trouvent des études critiques de la méthode utilisée dans les études de risques realisés par le CERN, dont une des membres du “Future of Humanity Institute» de l’Université d’Oxford et d’un examen sur le processus d’évaluation de la sécurité du LHC et l’autre par l’expert en analyse de risques et éthicien Dr Mark Leggett qui démontrent que le CERN à cette date n’a pas rempli plus d’un cinquième des critères nécessaires attendu pour une étude de sécurité moderne.

Tant qu’il n’y a pas de preuve claire que la production éventuelle de ‘micros trous noirs’ (qui devraient être créés, comme le confirment des nombreux scientifiques du CERN) posent ni à long, ni à court terme un danger pour la vie et la planète Terre, le CERN et les Etats membres devraient pas faire des expériences à haute énergie du tout. Au lieu de cela, il doit d’abord être démontrée par l’observation et des tests empiriques,

1.: que la comparaison des événements naturels dans l’atmosphère avec les expériences au LHC (tels qu’ils sont proclamés par le CERN) est légitime à tous les égards nécessaires et

2.: que la possible production de grandes quantités de micros trous noirs dans les collisionneurs de particules (considérée comme possible par le CERN) est clairement et 100% sans danger. Plusieurs expériences en cours et prévues (basé sur terre et dans l’atmosphère) sur des rayons cosmiques hautes énergétiques qui pourront apporter des réponses a ces questions.

Ainsi, tant que les garanties de sécurité de la machine à ‘Big Bang’ ne sont pas fournis, pas de collisions à haute énergie doivent être menées au LHC.

Si nécessaire, une demande d’injonction avec effet immédiat à l’ONU pourrait suivre. Les gouvernements de la Suisse et de la France sont demandés urgentement de garantir la sécurité des citoyens et de prendre les mesures nécessaires.

Enfin, l’opération et la planification des collisionneurs à haute énergie doit être contrôlée et régulée par un organisme similaire à l’Agence internationale de l’énergie atomique à l’ONU ou établie directement à l’AIEA dès que possible.

Après une année de coûteuses réparations suite à un grand accident, le CERN a introduit des faisceaux de protons à nouveau sans grande annonce préalable, contrairement a la fanfare l’année dernière. Les expériences (collisions de faisceaux) sont prévus pour les semaines suivantes, avec des énergies de plus en plus hautes - destiné à rompre un ‘record de monde’ douteux jusqu’à Noël. La capacité maximale est prévu d’être réalisé après de nouveaux ajustements techniques l’année prochaine.

‘conCERNed international’ se compose de différentes organisations et individus qui ont établi cette plainte et se compose de ou est en contact direct avec les critiques les plus connus du projet LHC, comme le Prof. Otto Roessler, Dr. Walter Wagner et bien d’autres. La plainte a fourni de nombreux points de vue critiques d’experts indépendants dans différents domaines hautement réputées, y compris des physiciens, des astrophysiciens, des chercheurs des risques, des philosophes et des juristes.

L’ONU-plainte est maintenant publié ici:

www.LHC-concern.info www.conCERNed-International.com

Contacts / Demandes:

USA:
James Blodgett MA, MBA, MS
Courrier électronique: Blodgett {at} risk-evaluation-forum(.)org
Téléphone: (001) 518-641-2279
www.conCERNed-International.com

Europe:
Markus Goritschnig MA
“LHC Critique” (LHC-Kritik)
Téléphone: +43 650 629 627 5
Courrier électronique: info {at} LHC-concern(.)info

www.LHC-concern.info

Comments

Comment from Admin LHC-Kritik
Time May 15, 2010 at 4:36 pm

Please follow the news blog on this page.

Pingback from Éxito inicial de mayor experimento del siglo: Gran Colisionador de Hadrones inició actividades… « Socioeconomía, teoría y práctica…
Time March 30, 2010 at 7:22 pm

[…] engullese todo a su alrededor. Obviamente, no ha ocurrido nada. Un grupo internacional denominado ConCERNed, presentó en su día una queja frente al Comité de Derechos Humanos de Las Naciones Unidas en […]

Pingback from The Probabilities of Disaster
Time March 10, 2010 at 4:37 pm

[…] the lawsuits  that have been placed against the company in Federal Courts. (to pdf: suit) and in Human Right Commissions all over the world,.  CERN adduces Diplomatic Immunity that it achieved during the cold war as a […]

Comment from Admin LHC-Kritik
Time January 25, 2010 at 4:12 pm

“Many of the physicists quoted in the media on LHC safety issues seem not to have engaged with the literature in any depth,” Prof. Eric Johnson told PhysOrg.com. “Physicists speaking to the public about the black-holes question portray it as a simple matter. It really is not. At the end of the day, the LHC may or may not be safe, but most of the arguments you hear in favor of the collider lack robustness.”

http://sciencenow.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/2010/122/1

Comment from Admin LHC-Kritik
Time January 25, 2010 at 2:10 am

Prof. Eric Johnson:

“The Black Hole Case: The Injunction Against the End of the World.” 76 Tennessee Law Review 819 (2009). Also available at:

http://arxiv.org/abs/0912.5480
PDF: http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0912/0912.5480.pdf

Latest article about this important new study:

“A Lawyer’s View of the Risk of Black Hole Catastrophe at the LHC”

January 22, 2010 By Lisa Zyga

http://www.physorg.com/news183380986.html

Also read:

Bloomberg Press:

Atom Smasher Exposes Hole in Earth’s Defenses: Kevin Hassett

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601039&sid=acnHtIDcdERA

„Technology Review“:

The Case of the Collider and the Great Black Hole

“The physicists have had their say. Now a legal study asks how a court might handle a request to halt a multibillion-dollar particle-physics experiment. The analysis makes for startling reading. […]
Today, we get a fascinating new perspective on the issue from Eric Johnson […]”

http://www.technologyreview.com/blog/arxiv/24611/

———————————
Info LHC-Critique:

New study: CERN / LHC / Big Bang Machine / Dangers / Black Hole Case / Human Rights / Lawsuits / Prof. Eric Johnson / International Law / Physics / Astronomy/ Cosmology

Legal expert Prof. Eric E. Johnson (University of North Dakota) profoundly analyses the discourse on dangers and risks at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) operated by the European Organization of Nuclear Research (CERN) in Switzerland in a new independent and critical study.

His multi-disciplinary perspective covers legal and socio-psychological aspects (”groupthink”) and also reflects the physical discussion in many details:

“THE BLACK HOLE CASE: THE INJUNCTION AGAINST THE END OF THE WORLD”

Published in the Tennessee Law Review, Dec. 2009.
Internet source: http://arxiv.org/abs/0912.5480

The renowned “Technology Review” (MIT) has just published a very interesting article about Prof. Johnson’s study:

“The Case of the Collider and the Great Black Hole

The physicists have had their say. Now a legal study asks how a court might handle a request to halt a multibillion-dollar particle-physics experiment. The analysis makes for startling reading.
[…]
Today, we get a fascinating new perspective on the issue from Eric Johnson […]”

http://www.technologyreview.com/blog/arxiv/24611/

Quotes from the critical conclusion of Prof. Johnson:

“Even a tiny chance of a black-hole catastrophe could be very significant as matter of equity before a court. The alleged downside, after all, is the disappearance of our planet down a cosmic drain. From my perspective as a lawyer, sizing up the merits of the case, I find the assurances provided by the particle-physics community to be quite lacking. In particular, I am struck by the fact that the safety assurances are based on scientific work that brazenly lacks independence.”

“…the history of the black-hole debate leaves me uneasy. There is a repeating pattern of airtight assurances—presented with utter conviction—that are quietly abandoned later when the scientific bedrock upon which they are based suddenly erodes.”

“My argument is one of law. My conviction is that, when a black-hole case arrives on a docket, no court should abdicate its role as a bursar of equity, even where, as here, the socio-political pressure to abstain will be immense, the factual terrain will be intensely intellectually challenging, and the jurisprudential conundrums are legion. At the end of the day, whether the LHC represents an intolerable danger is, in my view, an open question. I have not endeavored to provide a definitive answer. But I think the courts should. […] Otherwise, the wildly expanding sphere of human knowledge will overwhelm the institution of the courts and undo the rule of law—just when we need it most.”

Over all, this new 90-page study provides well structured and strong evidences that several concrete disaster scenarios cannot be excluded to arise from the big bang machine and thus have to be taken very seriously by scientific and political decision makers and the public. Especially, the paper provides important orientation to courts and for further studies. As a scientific document, it is now without doubt central in the LHC risk debate.

The author of the study:

Eric E. Johnson
Assistant Professor of Law
University of North Dakota
http://www.eejlaw.com

Recently, an international group of critics and experts filed a detailed complaint at the Human Rights Committee of the United Nations at Geneva concerning risks and dangers of the planned experiments at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC). A law suit filed at the European Court of Human Rights is pending, another at the German Constitutional Court, an American case is in appeal.

Risk assessment expert and ethicist Dr. Mark Leggett concludes in a recent study, that the CERN safety report is, “from a number of authoritative standpoints, out of date”, “has a conflict of interest” and satisfies less than a fifth of the expectable criteria. Chaos theory pioneer Prof. Otto E. Roessler estimates the risk of a black hole disaster at 15% if the experiment should continue as planned. Astrophysicist Dr. Rainer Plaga in well respected studies insistently talks about a “residual risk”. Well known physicist Dr. Tony Rothman suggests a permanent mechanism to deal with science and new technology concerns. Leading risk researcher Prof. Wolfgang Kromp supports a special environmental impact assessment of the LHC. Famous “thinker of speed” Prof. Paul Virilio strongly criticizes the experiment. Scientists from the “Future of Humanity Institute” at the University of Oxford conclude in a study that the CERN safety report cannot be the last word in the case.

Further info and contact to LHC-critical groups having filed law suits concerning LHC dangers:

www.LHC-concern.info
www.concerned.international.com
www.LHC-defense.org

————
LHC-Kritik

Comment from Admin LHC-Kritik
Time December 5, 2009 at 7:46 pm

www.LHC-concern.info | www.global-risk-sig.org | www.lhcfacts.org | www.risk-evaluation-forum.org | www.concerned-international.com

Current articles CERN / LHC December 5 2009:

LHC breakdown this week:

“Collider weathers power cut”:
http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2009/12/02/2140810.aspx

“Weird science”:
http://www.thenational.ae/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20091204/OPINION/712039921/1033/opinion

“Large Hadron Collider grinds to a halt… again”:
http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/02/large-hadron-collider-grinds-to-a-halt-again/

Detailed summarizing critical article with many references by Prof. Lloyd B. Lueptow, suggesting to halt the experiments:
“Will Physicists Destroy the World? The Large Hadron Collider and the Threats of Catastrophe”:
http://www.skeptic.com/eskeptic/09-11-11#feature

New critical book about the LHC-experiments:
“No Canary in the Quanta:
Who Gets to Decide if the Large Hadron Collider is Worth Gambling Our Planet?” (Kindle Edition)
by Harry V. Lehmann
http://www.amazon.com/No-Canary-Quanta-Collider-ebook/dp/B002W5RAYA/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=digital-text&qid=1259850038&sr=1-1

“How safe is the LHC, really?”
By James Larcombe:
http://larcombe.wordpress.com/2009/12/02/how-safe-is-the-lhc-really/

Very critical article in German:

Tageszeitung “Junge Welt” Nr. 281:
04.12.2009 / Feuilleton / Seite 13
http://www.jungewelt.de/2009/12-04/016.php

————————-
“conCERNed international” filed a detailed human rights complaint at the UN against the CERN member states for not having carried out their legal responsibilities to ensure citizens’ safety.

Please take a closer look at this important paper, which includes a detailed physical section describing the scientific discourse yet also has a general and very profound approach to the topic. It provides clear suggestions to improve safety and to urgently set new standards in high energy particle collider risk evaluation and features many critical quotes of well known scientists from different disciplines including physicists, astronomers, risk researchers, philosophers and legal experts:

www.concerned-international.com

Newsblog, downloads and linklist concerning UN complaint and LHC:

www.LHC-concern.info | www.concerned-international.com

Comment from Admin LHC-Kritik
Time November 30, 2009 at 9:10 pm

World’s largest atom smasher breaks power record

By ALEXANDER G. HIGGINS, Associated Press Writer - Mon Nov 30, 2009 11:12AM EST

GENEVA - The world’s largest atom smasher broke the world record for proton acceleration Monday, firing particle beams with 20 percent more power than the American lab that previously held the record.
[…]

http://tech.yahoo.com/news/ap/20091130/ap_on_hi_te/eu_big_bang_machine

————–

Saturday, November 28, 2009

Colliders Are Forever

http://bigsciencenews.blogspot.com/2009/11/colliders-are-forever.html

Admin LHC-Kritik Reply:

A CCC engineer says that the LHC lost a 1.0 TeV beam as they were ramping up energies, at 7:11 in the video:

http://cdsweb.cern.ch/record/1225475

“We first tried with one beam and we got over 1 TeV but we lost the beam a little before we reached the target ramp . . .”

No reports of collisions yet.

Thanks to Alan for the link.

Admin LHC-Kritik Reply:

Nicht unkritischer Artikel:

Erste Protonenkollisionen in Genf – Jetzt legt die »Gottes-Maschine« los!

http://info.kopp-verlag.de/news/erste-protonenkollisionen-in-genf-jetzt-legt-die-gottes-maschine-los.html

Comment from Admin LHC-Kritik
Time November 30, 2009 at 1:16 pm

LHC start up - operation 2009 - 2010 schedule:

CERN Press conference NOV 23 2009

This is what CERN officials exactly stated on the press conference. (According to this plan, there would be not enough time at all to closely study the results before increasing energy.)

1200 per beam within this year
When this runs well: a few changes
Then 3,5 per beams for several month (might open “new windows” in physics possibly)
Then when “learned” / “confidence” (in technical respects):
closer to 4,5 or 5 TeV in the second half of next year (2010)
(Then further plans are not very clear, apparently there are high costs involved)
Shutdown mode, without modifications no higher energy would be possible.
Then (maybe) maximum of 7 TeV per beam.

Some exact transcriptions from the same press conference demonstrate how open the question of possible outcomes is:

CERN director Heuer about what might be first discovered at the LHC:

“It depends how kind nature is to us. If we would know, then it would be nice but I need a crystal ball in order to predict it.“
[…]
“Give me a glass ball, a crystal ball, then I would know but I don’t know what nature has for us.“

Verdee (CMS): “We have this standard model. […] So, we have these prejudices which we have just gone through. But nature could have a complete surprise for us and that would be also very interesting. So one should not rule out the fact, we’ve just listed these theory things but nature could have done something different.”

Giotto (ATLAS): “Research is called research because we are going to find, to look for something that a priori is not well known. […] This is part of the charms. And I personally will be very happy in fact, I will be very happy to find something that has not been foreseen and that the nature in the end is always more simple and more elegant than our speculations of mankind and our theories.”

Comment from Admin LHC-Kritik
Time November 27, 2009 at 5:55 pm

Schwarz vor Augen

Risikoforschung | | Martin Faßbender

­Einige Forscher hoffen, am Genfer Teilchen­beschleuniger winzige Schwarze ­Löcher zu erzeugen. Andere befürchten hierdurch die Zerstörung der Erde.

http://www.freitag.de/wissen/0948-schwarze-loecher-cern

Pingback from Science Guardian/Global Health Review/Paradigm Review/Damned Heretics » Blog Archive » Global conCERN – Earth Down Tiny Plughole Soon, Maybe
Time November 26, 2009 at 6:59 am

[…] 73 page appeal to the UN Human Rights Committee and the Commissioner of Human Rights at the UN by conCERNed international and LHC Kritik […]

Comment from Admin LHC-Kritik
Time November 25, 2009 at 1:59 am

Huffington Post:

Re-Creating Creation, Take 2: The Large Hadron Collider Fires Up Again

(By Ali A. Rizvi, Canadian writer, physician, and musician)

[…]
And as of Friday, November 20, another group, very cleverly called conCERNed International, has filed a complaint with the United Nations Human Rights Committee, protesting the LHC’s imminent restart.

So why are these critics so scared of colliding hadrons?
[…]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ali-a-rizvi/re-creating-creation-take_b_366226.html

Comment from notepad publishing
Time November 24, 2009 at 1:50 pm

More articles in French, Englisch, Spanish and Italian:

—————-

Francais

Titel: Le CERN rallume son accélérateur de particules
Date: November 22 2009
Source: http://info.rsr.ch/fr/rsr.html?siteSect=500&sid=11469204&cKey=1258892135000
Quote: ‘De leur côté, les adversaires au redémarrage du LHC ne baissent pas les bras. Réunis sous la bannière «conCERNed international», ils ont annoncé vendredi avoir saisi le Comité des droits de l’homme de l’ONU à propos des dangers que ferait courir la machine à la population. Les opposants estiment que les expériences qui vont être menées au sein de l’accélérateur comportent des risques que les responsables du CERN ont mal évalués. Des micro trous noirs pourraient être produits, avalant la matière autour d’eux et provocant la fin du monde.’

Titel: L’accélérateur de particules redémarre et ses opposants font appel à l’ONU
Date: November 21 2009
Source: http://www.leprogres.fr/fr/permalien/article/2215284/L-accelerateur-de-particules-redemarre-et-ses-opposants-font-appel-a-l-ONU.html
Quote: ‘Des opposants au plus grand accélérateur de particules du monde - connus sous le nom de ConCERNed international - du grand collisionneur de hadrons (LHC) ont déposé une plainte auprès du Comité des droits de l’homme de l’ONU, estimant que le Cern et ses Etats membres (dont la France) ont violé plusieurs articles du Pacte international relatif aux droits civils et politiques de l’ONU. « Tant qu’il n’y a pas de preuves claires que l’éventuelle production de mini-trous noirs - que plusieurs scientifiques du Cern espèrent créer - ne représente pas un danger ni à court terme, ni à long terme pour la vie et pour la planète Terre », le Cern ne devrait pas relancer le LHC, avertissent les opposants.’

Titel: L’accélérateur de particules du Cern a redémarré
Date: November 21 2009
Source: http://info.france2.fr/europe/L-acc%E9l%E9rateur-de-particules-du-Cern-a-red%E9marr%E9-59064164.html
Quote: ‘En dehors des incidents survenus, des éléments d’incertitude existent. Des opposants au LHC - connus sous le nom de ConCERNed international - ont saisi vendredi l’ONU, accusant la Suisse, la France et l’Allemagne ne pas “avoir exercé leurs responsabilités légales afin de garantir la sécurité des citoyens”.’

Titel: Accélérateur de particules du Cern: ses opposants font appel à l’ONU
Date: November 20 2009
Source: http://www.besac.com/news/news-item.php?idNews=7389
Quote: ‘Des opposants au plus grand accélérateur de particules du monde, qui devrait être relancé samedi après quatorze mois d’arrêt après une grave panne, ont saisi vendredi l’ONU accusant la Suisse, la France et l’Allemagne ne pas “garantir la sécurité de leurs citoyens”. Ces adversaires - connus sous le nom de ConCERNed international - du grand collisionneur de hadrons (LHC) accusent les Etats membres du Centre européen de recherche nucléaire (Cern), “spécialement la Suisse, la France et l’Allemagne, ne pas avoir exercé leurs responsabilités légales afin de garantir la sécurité des citoyens”.’

Titel: Le LHC du Cern redémarre après 14 mois
Date: November 20 2009
Source: http://www.lefigaro.fr/flash-actu/2009/11/20/01011-20091120FILWWW00701-le-lhd-du-cern-redemarre-apres-14-mois.php
Quote: ‘Mais les incidents du LHC ne sont pas les seuls éléments d’incertitudes que connaît le Cern. Des opposants au LHC - connus sous le nom de ConCERNed international - ont saisi vendredi l’ONU, accusant la Suisse, la France et l’Allemagne ne pas «avoir exercé leurs responsabilités légales afin de garantir la sécurité des citoyens».’

Titel: CERN opposants font appel a l’ONU
Date: November 20 2009
Source: http://mobile.france24.com/fr/20091120-acc-rateur-particules-cern-opposants-font-appel-lonu
Quote:’Des opposants au plus grand accélérateur de particules du monde, qui devrait être relancé samedi après quatorze mois d’arrêt après une grave panne, ont saisi vendredi l’ONU accusant la Suisse, la France et l’Allemagne ne pas “garantir la sécurité de leurs citoyens”. Ces adversaires - connus sous le nom de ConCERNed international - du grand collisionneur de hadrons (LHC) accusent les Etats membres du Centre européen de recherche nucléaire (Cern), “spécialement la Suisse, la France et l’Allemagne, ne pas avoir exercé leurs responsabilités légales afin de garantir la sécurité des citoyens”.’

Titel: CERN: le redémarrage du LHC est imminent
Date: November 20 2009
Source: http://www.lematin.ch/flash-info/suisse/cern-redemarrage-lhc-imminent
Quote: ‘De leur côté, les adversaires au redémarrage du LHC ne baissent pas les bras. Réunis sous la bannière “conCERNed international”, ils ont annoncé avoir saisi le Comité des droits de l’homme de l’ONU à propos des dangers que ferait courir la machine à la population.’

Titel: LHC: ses opposants font appel à l’ONU
Date: November 20 2009
Source: http://www.cyberpresse.ca/sciences/200911/20/01-923477-lhc-ses-opposants-font-appel-a-lonu.php
Quote: ‘Ces adversaires - connus sous le nom de ConCERNed international - du grand collisionneur de hadrons (LHC) accusent les Etats membres du Centre européen de recherche nucléaire (Cern), «spécialement la Suisse, la France et l’Allemagne, ne pas avoir exercé leurs responsabilités légales afin de garantir la sécurité des citoyens».
Ces opposants ont déposé une plainte auprès du Comité des droits de l’homme de l’ONU, estimant que le Cern et ses Etats membres ont violé plusieurs articles du Pacte international relatif aux droits civils et politiques de l’ONU.’

English

Titel: If You’re an Inhabitant of the Planet Earth, A Lawsuit May Affect Your Rights
Date: November 23 2009
Source: http://classactionblawg.com/2009/11/23/if-youre-an-inhabitant-of-the-planet-earth-a-lawsuit-may-affect-your-rights/
Quote: ‘The complaint, filed with the UN Human Rights Committee, seeks to save every inhabitant of the planet (and perhaps the entire solar system) from what could be imminent annihilation if CERN’s Large Hadron Collider (LHC) in Switzerland creates micro-black holes when it begins to smash subatomic particles together at near light speed this month. The complaint was filed by a group calling itself ConCERNed International, who seeks to enjoin the project until CERN’s scientists can prove that there is no chance that the collider will pose a danger in the form a “mass production” of “microscopic black holes.” The UN Human Rights complaint follows an unsuccessful civil lawsuit last year filed in Federal Court in Hawaii attempting to enjoin operation of the collider.’

Titel: Mark Henderson “Not another LHC lawsuit…”
Date: November 22 2009
Source: http://thelunaticarms.wordpress.com/2009/11/22/mark-henderson-not-another-lhc-lawsuit/
Quote: ‘Mr Henderson complains of yet another “ridiculous lawsuit” waiting in the wings against the Large Hadron Collider. For those that do not know, this machine seeks to recreate the birth of the Universe.’

Italiano:

Titel: Depositata una denuncia al Comitato diritti umani dell’ONU
Date: November 20 2009
Source: http://www.cdt.ch/confederazione/cronaca/15193/conto-alla-rovescia-per-l-lhc.html
Quote: ‘Gli oppositori al Large Hadron Collider (LHC) hanno inoltrato denuncia al Comitato dei diritti umani dell’ONU per i pericoli che l’acceleratore farebbe correre all’umanità. Il collettivo «conCERNed international» afferma che le esperienze condotte dai ricercatori del Cern comportano rischi mal valutati. Le previste collisioni di particelle ad energie elevatissime provocheranno uno stato della materia mai osservato finora, rileva il collettivo in un comunicato. Situazioni così estreme potrebbero favorire l’apparizione di mini «buchi neri» suscettibili di aspirare ciò che sta loro attorno, fino a provocare la fine del

Espagnol:

Titel: La costosa máquina que busca cambiar la física está de vuelta
Date: November 24 2009
Source: http://www.mer.cl/modulos/generacion/mobileASP/detailNew.asp?idNoticia=C23247420091124&strNamePage=MERSTCT013AA2411.htm&codCuerpo=705&codRev=&iNumPag=13&strFecha=2009-11-24&iPage=1&tipoPantalla=240
Quote: ‘Mientras tanto, el grupo ConCERNed International presentó una queja ante la comisión de derechos humanos de la ONU contra los científicos del CERN por el riesgo que el experimento genere microagujeros negros que podrían hasta acabar con el planeta.’

Comment from Admin LHC-Kritik
Time November 23, 2009 at 5:32 pm

Nouvel Observateur:

Redémarrage réussi pour le LHC
NOUVELOBS.COM | 23.11.2009 | 11:14

[…]
Quand la puissance désirée sera atteinte, le LHC pourra enfin livrer des premiers résultats physiques. Les opposants au grand collisionneur de hadrons, n’ont pas attendus eux pour se manifester et demander l’arrêt du LHC. Regroupés sous l’appellation «conCERNed international», ils ont déposé plainte devant le Comité des droits de l’homme de l’ONU et réclamé l’arrêt immédiat de la machine du Cern. Ces opposants craignent l’apparition de mini trous noirs lors des expériences et affirment qu’il n’existe pas de preuves permettant d’établir la non dangerosité de ces trous noirs. Une opinion que dément formellement le Cern.

http://tempsreel.nouvelobs.com/actualites/sciences/fondamental/20091123.OBS8548/redemarrage_reussi_pour_le_lhc.html

Comment from Admin LHC-Kritik
Time November 23, 2009 at 3:23 pm

Currently: CERN Press conference: http://webcast.cern.ch/live.py

Admin LHC-Kritik Reply:

CERN press conference today, November 23 2009.

Some exact transcriptions:

CERN director Heuer about what might be first discovered at the LHC:

“It depends how kind nature is to us. If we would know that, it would be nice but I need a crystal ball in order to predict it.“
[…]
“Give me a glass ball, a crystal ball, then I would know but I don’t know what nature has for us.“

Verdee (CMS): “We have this standard model. […] So, we have these prejudices which we have just gone through. But nature could have a complete surprise for us and that would be also very interesting. So one should not rule out the fact, we’ve just listed these theory things but nature could have done something different.”

Gianotti (ATLAS): “Research is called research because we are going to find, to look for something that a priori is not well known. […] This is part of the charms. And I personally will be very happy in fact, I will be very happy to find something that has not been foreseen and that the nature in the end is always more simple and more elegant than our speculations of mankind and our theories.”

Comment from Admin LHC-Kritik
Time November 22, 2009 at 1:31 pm

Störfall CERN: Mysteriöser Countdown des Teilchenbeschleunigers LHC

Samstag, den 21. November 2009 um 17:05 Uhr von Dr. Rolf Froböse

Inzwischen läuft der LHC nach einer 14monatigen Zwangspause wieder. Der Start war allerdings alles andere als reibungslos und über die Hintergründe schweigt sich das CERN diesmal beharrlich aus. Zu den Fakten:

[…]

http://www.readers-edition.de/2009/11/21/stoerfall-cern-mysterioeser-countdown-des-teilchenbeschleunigers-lhc/

Admin LHC-Kritik Reply:

Die Zeitgeist-Maschine
(11. November 2009/tl.) – Das Kernforschungszentrum CERN in Genf ist die grösste und teuerste Wissenschaftsbürokratie auf der Erde. Sie hat die Welt fundamental verändert – aber nicht durch physikalische Erkenntnisse.

[…]

Auch für die Kosten dieses wissenschaftlich-bürokratischen Unternehmens finden sich keine Vergleichsgrössen. Es verschlingt jedes Jahr eine Milliarde Schweizer Franken. Deutschland trägt mit einem Fünftel den grössten Anteil eines einzelnen Landes.
Der äusseren Dimension, dem finanziellen Aufwand und der technischen Komplexität der Anlage entspricht die Unbescheidenheit der Fragen, auf die man sich Antworten erhofft: Wie entstand das Universum? Was ist der Beweis für die These vom Urknall? Es geht um nicht weniger als die Weltformel.

Als die Experimente vor etwas mehr als einem Jahr gestartet werden sollten, wurden auch Bedenken laut. Wenn die heute gängigen physikalischen Theorien stimmen, dann entstehen als eine Folge der Experimente kurzzeitig winzige so genannte «Schwarze Löcher». Unter Fachleuten besteht aber weitestgehende Einigkeit, dass davon keine Gefahr ausgeht. Sorgen kamen auch dadurch auf, dass wiederholt Terroristen im engsten Umfeld des CERN beschäftigt waren. So war der vor 15 Jahren beim CERN beschäftigte Physiker Mourad Dhina Chef der algerischen islamistischen «Islamischen Heilspartei» (FIS). Im Oktober diesen Jahres wurde ein CERN-Physiker algerischer Herkunft, der auch an der ETH Zürich lehrt, verhaftet. Er hat offenbar Kontakte zu Al-Qaida und hatte sich Glaubensgenossen gegenüber mit Anschlagsplänen gebrüstet.

Im Rückblick auf mehr als fünf Jahrzehnte CERN-Geschichte und im Ausblick auf das Kommende, ist es bemerkenswert, dass das CERN zwar Heerscharen von Naturwissenschaftlern beschäftigt, aber bislang kaum Erkenntnisse hervorgebracht hat, die über das hinausgehen, was auch andernorts für einen Bruchteil des Einsatzes an Mitteln erreicht worden ist.

http://www.factum-magazin.ch/wFactum_de/aktuell/2009_11_11_cern.php

Comment from Admin LHC-Kritik
Time November 22, 2009 at 11:59 am

Jesus Dias in an article at Gizmodo:

OK, Now I’m Nervous About the Large Hadron Collider

I used to think that nothing would happen with the Large Hadron Collider. I even made fun of the nutters saying it’s going to destroy the world. After reading CERN Director for Accelerators’s latest statement, I’m not so sure:

The LHC is a far better understood machine than it was a year ago. We’ve learned from our experience, and engineered the technology that allows us to move on. That’s how progress is made.

Wait wait wait. WAIT, Mr. Director for Accelerators Steve Myers Sir. What do you mean that the machine is “far better understood” now? How could they spend a billion brazillion dollars in this thing and don’t understand it in the first place? Do we really know what are we up to here? Should I book a ticket to Costa Rica and go watch the end of the world from the beach?
[…]

http://gizmodo.com/5409618/ok-now-im-nervous-about-the-large-hadron-collider

Comment from notepad publishing
Time November 21, 2009 at 11:30 am

CONGRATULATONS!

The complaint at the Human Rights Committee of the United Nations at Geneva is a major step in protecting humanity from dangerous action at the CERN LHC.

We hope the complaint gets properly evaluated and efficiently processed by the UN Human Rights Committee and that the international press gives this major event sufficient visibility.

Humanity has a right to be protected from not properly evaluated scientific experiments!

Comment from Admin LHC-Kritik
Time November 21, 2009 at 4:58 am

Very interestin comments by risk assassement expert and ethicist Mark Leggett PhD (Griffith Univesity) to a report at “Science Insider” about UN Complaint of conCERNed, here the first one:

“Some of the same critics filed unsuccessful lawsuits last year to try to keep the LHC from running, notes CERN’s Gillies. “Their arguments are as baseless as they were year ago,” he says.

I suggest the following shows that the court action MR Gillies refers to was in fact in an important sense successful, and that a key plank of the argument – on flaws in the method used by CERN to assess the risk from running the LHC – is far from baseless.

In 2007 and 2008, a court case was held in the US seeking an injunction against the LHC continuing. This case was dismissed, on the grounds that the US court did not have jurisdiction. [62] However, in her decision, concerning decision-making on the risk from the LHC, Judge Helen Gillmor wrote these history-making words: “It is clear that Plaintiffs’ action reflects disagreement among scientists about the possible ramifications of the operation of the Large Hadron Collider. This extremely complex debate is of concern to more than just the physicists.”

The European Commission guidelines “Improving the knowledge base for better policies (2002)”, “commission on the collection and use of expertise” Principles and Guidelines state that one of the three determinants of quality of advice is pluralism:

“Wherever possible, a diversity of viewpoints should be assembled. This diversity may result from differences in scientific approach, different types of expertise, different institutional affiliations, or contrasting opinions over the fundamental assumptions underlying the issue. Is it appropriate to mobilise experts beyond the scientific community? These may include, for example, lawyers, ethicists…”

How then do the latest official reports assessing the risk from the LHC compare with the EC guidelines on plurality of expertise?

The LSAG report itself was conducted by five particle physicists. The associated report “Astronomical Implications of Hypothetical Stable TeV-Scale Black Holes” was conducted by two particle physicists, one of whom was also in the LSAG report team. It was reviewed by the 20-member CERN Council Scientific Policy Committee, also composed only of particle physicists. All of the contributors to the CERN 2008 safety review (including the SPC report) are presently listed in the CERN directory.

So all these 26 were particle physicists. Despite this large number, none were “experts beyond the scientific community… for example, lawyers, ethicists..”, despite that being recommended by the European Commission.
This particle physicists-only advice was then put to CERN Council for consideration and advice to the relevant governments controlling CERN. CERN Council represents the 20 governments funding the LHC and consists of 14 particle physicists and 14 civil servants.

Half of the Council is therefore the interest group concerned – particle physicists. And the other half is also not immune from possible vested interest. This is because the Council as a whole has approved the prior funding of and building of the LHC. As such, CERN Council is far from arms-length from the project, and may feel a bias to justify its prior decisions of support.

Given this possibility of bias in the decision-making within and about the LSAG report, the complainants are uneasy because of reference to a basic sense of fairness. This is embodied in one of the rules of natural justice or procedural fairness: the rule against bias (nemo debet esse judex in propria sua cause – “no one to be a judge in their own cause”).
It should also be pointed out that the EC guidelines on the use of expertise arose precisely out of an event (the mad cow disease crisis) in which people died partly because of narrowly-based scientific advice. CERN, also assessing the possibility of events in which people may die, has used none of the EC guidelines, indeed gives no inkling that it is aware they exist, and has produced exquisitely narrowly-based advice.
With this background, a case can be made - and is in the Complaint to the UN - that in regulating the risk from the LHC CERN Council has a conflict of interest, and is under-constituted to assess such a novel, potentially catastrophic and therefore sensitive risk. On this basis, a new review panel based on best practice for such panels should be set up to advise national, EU, and governments worldwide on the adequacy or otherwise of the LSAG report, and the LHC not produce collisions until that panel has reported.

http://blogs.sciencemag.org/scienceinsider/2009/11/physicists-back.html

—————
—————

Somehow ignorant article in Times Online by an author obviously not having read the UN complaint, but judging about it, as if he already knew, that the appearance of a “dragon” was as likely as the LHC-risks in discussion. This comes from a very misleading but frequently quoted argument based on quantum physics, that anything could happen all the time but with extremely small chances. This is not what the LHC risk discussion is talking about. Logically, it is not as likely that anything else would produce the same than the LHC might produce…

http://timesonline.typepad.com/science/2009/11/not-another-lhc-lawsuit.html

Admin LHC-Kritik Reply:

To the comment of spokesman James Gillies (CERN):
The ECHR suit is still pending.
And how does Mr. Gillies “know” about the arguments in the UN Communication just after the detailed 70-page paper has been published? This paper indeed will need a closer study.

Comment from Admin LHC-Kritik
Time November 21, 2009 at 4:19 am

Romandie News

CERN: le redémarrage du LHC est imminent

Le redémarrage du LHC, le plus puissant accélérateur de particules du monde, est imminent. Le CERN se prépare à faire circuler un faisceau de protons ce week-end, au grand dam de certains scientifiques qui considèrent que les dangers ont été mal estimés.

http://www.romandie.com/infos/ats/display2.asp?page=20091120164335160172019048000_brf042.xml

Admin LHC-Kritik Reply:

Tageszeitung “Österreich” über “conCERNed international”:

http://www.gutenmorgen.apa.at/PSP5/do/Fulltext.act?token=OGWATGWPPTOOWEGASWHOGOSOSGESWTEWAPT

Comment from Admin LHC-Kritik
Time November 21, 2009 at 1:17 am

Tribune de Genève

ATS | 20.11.2009 | 15:54

Les opposants au grand collisionneur de hadrons (LHC), regroupés sous la bannière «conCERNed international», estiment que les expériences qui vont être menées au sein de l’accélérateur comportent des risques que les responsables du CERN (Centre européen de recherche nucléaire) ont mal évalués.

Lors des collisions de particules à très haute énergie, la matière sera dans un état jamais encore observé à ce jour. Lors de ces situations extrêmes, les opposants au LHC craignent la formation de micro trous noirs qui pourraient aspirer l’environnement autour d’eux et provoquer peut être la fin du monde.

ConCERNed international demande que le CERN renonce à des collisions à très haute énergie aussi longtemps qu’il n’existe pas de preuve formelle que ces mini-trous noirs sont inoffensifs pour la vie et la planète Terre. Selon l’association, des expériences sont prévues pour faire la lumière sur cette question.

Dans sa plainte devant le Comité des droits de l’homme de l’ONU, conCERNed international estime que la Suisse et la France, en tant qu’Etats hôtes du LHC, ont une responsabilité particulière dans cette affaire. L’Allemagne, gros contributeur du CERN et membre du Conseil de l’organisation, est aussi spécialement visée.
De son côté, le CERN a toujours affirmé que les expériences qui seront conduites au sein LHC sont sans risque.

http://www.tdg.ch/geneve/actu/cern-opposants-lhc-saisissent-comite-droits-homme-2009-11-20

Comment from Admin LHC-Kritik
Time November 20, 2009 at 10:48 pm

“Nature”:

“conCERNed would like to see the formation of an agency similar to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to regulate particle accelerators. But I wouldn’t necessarily expect this to stop collisions in the coming weeks. Given what I’ve seen of IAEA diplomacy, even if the UN decides to form such an agency, it will take most of the LHC’s first physics run just to draw up an agenda for its inaugural meeting.”

http://blogs.nature.com/news/thegreatbeyond/2009/11/collider_collisions_draw_near.html

Comment from Rudolf Uebbing
Time November 20, 2009 at 1:57 pm

Die Frage ist zu stellen, ob eine Qualität der
Sicherheitsbeurteilung zu den neuen physikalischen LHC-Experimenten im Nachhinein herbei geführt werden kann, die zumindestens dem Umfang und den hohen Standards z.B. einer
“Deutschen Risikostudie Kernkraftwerke” entsprechend gleichwertig ist.

Das kann z.B. heissen, es muss nachgesehen werden, ob tatsächlich eine Vollständigkeit der Beurteilungsunterlagen gegeben ist und alle betroffenen Sachverhalte angemessen berücksichtigt wurden.

Comment from Admin LHC-Kritik
Time November 20, 2009 at 1:17 pm

This was a work of many many month…
Thanks to all who contributed so much time, knowledge, wisdom and energy!