[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by photon

So you admit you aren't in a position to assess the risk of this experiment but then post a thread questioning the risk of this experiment?

Because I can't assess the risk means I can't question it? Come on now.

(BTW Scientific American is fine, but I wouldn't call it a quality source of scientific information, it's more along the lines of Popular Science than Nature. So I wouldn't use info from there as a guideline. That said I read it myself sometimes.)

Yes and no. Scientific American it is not like Poplular Science. Many qualified and verified studies are posted in it (always as brief summaries however). And that is not the only source of information I use.

Saying that it isn't being done carefully because people aren't aware of it doesn't make any sense either. I would argue probably better care is being taken because it isn't a popular (thus political) issue. As you point out, 99.99% of people aren't equipped to even understand anything about it let alone assess the risk, so they'd fall back on the "destroy earth bad, so stop doing it" position.

I would disagree with this. Things are usually covered better when it is at the fore front of peoples life. To say it is being better looked at because the populace doesn't know about it is backward in my opinion. At least when people are aware of something there is more debate about it.

I have no doubt that minds far greater than ours have been all over it enough times.

Agreed, and there are scientists that do not agree that we should be charging ahead so fast with this.

Of course it can. Like I said it's also possible that gravity stops working or that you quantum tunnel your way outside without opening the door. But if the chances are so low that you'd have to wait far past the heat death of the universe for it to happen, how much do you let that risk influence you?

You can't make this statement because we don't know. It could happen on the first try. No waiting required.

It's easier to address irrational fears with irrational responses.

Irrational fear? Ok.

That doesn't say anything about the risks of this experiment however. Are you saying that even though the risks are vanishingly small, we shouldn't throw the dice simply because the possibility of something bad happening exists?

That is the problem....it is throwing the dice. All I am saying is maybe we should be sure that it wont happen.

With that reasoning, nothing would ever have been invented for fear of burning the planet down (fire), punching a hole in the earth's crust (nuclear explosions) or killing us all with a new plague (any kind of medical research).

Come on now. No scientist predicted the world would be destroyed with one nuclear explosion. What we are dealing with now is much more complex and dangerous than playing with fire. As for a new plague, yes, it may kill all humans, but a plague could not destroy the solar system.