Wow, this article sparks many mixed emotions. On one hand, science for science-sake is one of the most commendable forms of lifetime commitment. However, on the other hand is the risk/benefits to the common people (who ultimately pay the final costs or reap benefits.) This is not a simple case. To date CERN has given the world the MRI, multiple telcom and data-storage advances, and the world-wide-web that we are now using. I hope that CERN, and other similar facilities continue to produce side benefits for society in tandem to their quest for further exploration. Using LHC to hunt for elusive theorized particles or whatever, is quite similar to using rifles to go hunting for wild quail or rabbit. A gun can be an indispensable tool for this task. A key to a successful outing is that everyone in the party is well versed on the functioning of all the firearms. Also, hunting is usually only permitted far from populated areas. The problem with LHC is we can't know exactly how it will function because it will be functioning in areas with high degrees of uncertainty. Also there is no way to shield populated areas from some forms of mishap. The biggest concern, however, is that safety assurances are largely based on one unverified set of assumptions predicting the mini black-holes with evaporate away. If there were no counter-arguments or opposite alternate explanations, there I would be less wary. Unfortunately, that is not the case any longer. There is an alternative: The Dominium model, a modern cosmologic retrofitting of the lens through which we view established data. The data doesn't change; established measurements are undeniable; finally, in the new model there no longer are any paradoxes between theory and physical evidence.