Buy Amoxicillin Without Prescription
Buy amoxicillin without prescription, I am a professional gambler. And from this unique perspective I speak with a certain wisdom. I have strong feelings about the CERN LHC experiment and in my view, it is completely obvious that CERN is making an unwise gamble. I don't think the scientists have any understanding of the negative side of Expected Value. In poker you must ask yourself, "If I played this exact scenario over and over again, ad infinitum, will I come out ahead or behind?" And in blackjack, the so-often mistaken strategy is to double down each successive hand until you gain a win. In the long run this strategy fails every time because it has a -ev.
If it turns out the LHC has a -ev and they collide particles ad infinitum, then we may all be doomed.
My understanding of the science involved is limited by comparison to others, but I believe that Walter Wagner and James Blodgett have laid out a strong and credible case that the LHC is taking risks the public would not accept. And that they have laid out this case using strong deductive reasoning based on statements by credible scientists. CERN is only able to defend their experiment using weak inductive reasoning. This is a clear advantage for the side of safety.
All anyone really needs to know about this debate is the difference in strength between deduction and induction. Please go to Wikipedia and search these two topics. If you can understand them, you will understand the widom of what I say. If Walter Wagner and James Blodgett's premise is correct, then their conclusion MUST be correct. This is ABSOLUTELY NOT THE CASE with CERN's arguments. Their arguments support their conclusions, but do not entail them!
It is also clear to me that the scientists of CERN are trying to keep this discussion within the realm of hard-to-understand science. And they are desperately avoiding the subject of risk. This may be because they don't understand risk, but more likely, it is because risk can be understood by the average man while their science cannot.
In conclusion, I believe that we have the upper hand. More work is desperately needed as this issue MUST become public knowledge. But once it does, we will see safety prevail. Because the human race is not self-destructive, no matter what the odds or Nobel Prize rewards.
Another
Similar posts: Buy clomid without prescription. Buy accutane without prescription. Buy zoloft without prescription. Buy nexium without prescription. Buy wellbutrin sr without prescription. Buy kamagra without prescription. Buy kamagra effervescent without prescription. Buy kamagra oral jelly without prescription. Buy melatonin without prescription. Buy acomplia without prescription.
Trackbacks from: Buy amoxicillin without prescription. Buy altace online without prescription. Buy meclizine without prescription. Buy lamisil online without prescription. Buy maxalt online without prescription. Buy glucophage without prescription. Buy viagra plus without prescription. Buy viagra without prescription. Buy petcam (metacam) oral suspension without prescription. Armour online without prescription.
October 3rd, 2008 at 7:08 am
Huh? I am a physics student and I don’t get your worry. Induction has always been a vital part in the process of acquiring knowledge. With deduction alone, you’d be going in circles.
I’d say the probabilities of LHC creating something to devour the earth is effectively zero. Because, the LHC is unlike to produce anything that cosmic collisions (many has much higher energy) has not produce before. In terms of order of magnitude concerned, you might see a human going through a wall first. (without destroying the wall).
September 18th, 2010 at 10:38 am
Hallaloalah Sandy, hello owner of this blog, hello James (if at place):
I collected argumentation supporting James Blodgett at
http://junkerlchen.deviantart.com/
under the rubric “Journal” and at other places in the web -countercheck it. See why by this you can deduce argumentation of CERN is not sufficient for the LHC and related experiments to be safe.
In this sense: The induced model to guarantuee safety (comparison with cosmic rays mainly) is not sufficiently (?? - I admit, but this not discussed as well) proved. Read for your own. Now - having understood the leaks here (or refuted me?) - you can deduce with James the experiments should be halted.
It’s not so difficult I think to get worried!! Sorry…
But let’s go on o.k. - James already did much, I did much as well, CERN did most, that’s the reason they do not want to “halt”
I tried to start Hawaiian - I am a wiki sometimes (seldom)
It’s not funny but it’s useless for me to show here severeness which can not be fulfilled. I advanced already enormous saving minor humour (this last clause here if you allow Sandy and all).
Try the best to know what you are doing!!!
Oh I forgot the spam protection… but now
September 18th, 2010 at 11:00 am
I just tried to pass the wall - a minor bump was the result, not an enormous one I admit. I took care for myself doing this….
it was a minor bump… partly it energized me being a little slap only
September 18th, 2010 at 11:07 am
I follow Ahimsa, Kaizen, Yoshin Ryu: minislap -> o.k.