I never said the court “ruled” — the latter’s words werew “it is the opinion of the court”. If wikipedia suppressed this, it is so much the worse for wikipedia.

Sometimes in life it is legitimate to shout for the police — even though dialog is always preferable. LIFEBOAT has the chance to invite CERN for the dialog it refuses. Please, do what you can to make this come true.

I have pointed this out to you before, suggesting that the wikipedia entry should be updated if incorrect… This besides I have stated on a number of occasions, that I am on-side regarding a desire for a safety conference — I have just questioned whether there is a legal basis for it as regards your continued reference to a court ruling whereby the official position appears to be that the plea was rejected. As regards your allegation that I am self-installed as a webadmin, this is not the case, I was approached as regards this and accepted. And I can only perform this voluntary service to Lifeboat to my best judgement. I am sorry Otto, but I see you overstepping the mark on a number of occasions and another webadmin at Lifeboat has also endorsed this viewpoint recently.

Please, show me where I eve used “defamation, slander or incitement to violence.”

I did call for the police, and I did call for citizens not to tolerate being threatened regarding their own lives and the lives of their children. But I always said that the means by which they can achieve this goal is to insist on clarification.

Now Lifeboat, under your own new ruling, censors the right of human beings to be informed about an aggressive act being levelled against their own lives and those of their children.

Why are you doing this openly — in case you cannot defend yourself against the reproach of suppressing life-saving information from the readers of this blog — ?

Why don’t you say: “I am on your side when you request a scientific safety conference”?

Why are you still questioning that the Cologne Administrative Court officially asked as it public opinion at the end of its ruling for the “safety conference” on January 27, 2011?

As regards your request for CERN to ‘reveal the name of the single scientist’ which disproves your danger — I refer you to the section on white dwarfs in the G&M safety report as discussed in another thread — although I understand you dismiss this as mathematical witchcraft — even though you have yet to highlight the flaws within it.

Well the first collision was done Friday noted here:
“17:40 colliding for the first time at 4 TeV with nominal bunches.“
They are still in the commissioning stage with these test collisions being one of the final steps in the commissioning. The first physics run is set to begin next week.

As I said before I’m not connected to CERN, this is all information that is available for anyone to see.

I am blushing for the fact that I described that CERN’s detectors in addition are blind to CERN’s most hoped-for success, the creation of miniature black holes; in my Telemach paper in the African Journal of Mathematics.

Do you know when colliding bunches are going to be produced according to plan?

And do you know who bears the ultimate responsibility for CERN’s doings? Specifically: Whom can I ask to allow me to talk to him or her before the danger (unless my results can be disproved) sets in?