Key exerpts:

On Black Hole may destroy the Earth:
‘If CERN is successful producing them it would be producing about one per second. Many, many, many of them. And most of them would fly away. Only one in every million or so would stay inside the Earth because it would be slow enough not to escape. So its intrinsic velocity and there will be almost no friction they all would go right through the Earth and go away, except when it is slow enough. It would then be circling inside the Earth and if it would be growing fast enough – which I think that I can proof – it would eat the Earth from the inside out in a few years time. ‘

On Black Hole may destroy the Sun and the Moon:
‘The size of any mass, of any black hole which has the mass of the Earth, is 1.9 centimeters. But of course much of the energy would be radiated away so it would eventually be a little bit smaller than 1.9 centimeters. But we were talking about the danger to the Sun and the Moon. To the moon for example. So some of these many little black holes that would be radiating away they would be going in all directions. I didn’t know that when I said the moon would be safe. I learned that from Professor Landua in CERN. And therefore as to the Moon: Enough would be hitting the moon and one would be slow enough to stay on the Moon. It’s not very probable but if there are many enough it would also happen with one hitting the Moon and also with the Sun. So the Sun would go out as well.’

Selected press coverage of interview with Prof. Roessler:

Media: The Register
Link: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/03/16/lhc_sun_moon_doom
Title: The LHC will implode the Moon or PUT OUT THE SUN’
Quote: ‘Professor Rössler wouldn’t make our list just for this, however: what’s really brought him up on our radar is an excellent interview he gave to Swiss anti-LHC tinfoiler blog (sorry, “non profit news agency”) notepad.ch. In it, the prof reveals some new and splendid notions on how the great Collider will doom us all’

Media: Scientias.nl
Link: http://www.scientias.nl/lhc-kan-de-zon-vernietigen/5890
Title: “LHC kan de zon vernietigen” – ‘LHC can destroy the sun’

you’re a details lover, PJM isn’t so far a place where people have the habit to say that Muslims are non-violent or peace-lovers, but rather that sort of jihadist murderers, who can stone women, rape little girls, behead infidels… you could get more croustillant details on specialised sites.

So “Iveribodi” here can understand what I wrote, by my term, “true or falsh muslim”.

Now, if you had wanted me to tell you if I asked him these questions about islamist violence, I did ! and he didn’t seem to know about such cases, to which I responded him that they are related on internet, TV, and even filmed on videos. The raison might be because of Tunisian political regime, also I never heard our former compatriots in these “colonies” telling such stories about the north African muslims. As I already said on another topic, the tunisian islam is a bit different and more tolerant, it’s malekism.

Also Jews that were living in Tunisia and emigrate to France after the independance, almost all are saying that life in Tunisia was joyful !

The simple declaration that “true muslims don’t want to kill people” actually tells very little about that person’s attachment to Shariah or susceptibility to islamist arguments. It is no more meaningful than saying, “true American’s don’t want to kill people.” It’s a truism. Of course we don’t – and yet we DO kill people. We kill murderers, terrorists, etc. So the proper follow-up to a declaration of “true muslims don’t want to kill people” would be, “under what circumstances would a muslim feel obliged, justified or religiously non-culpable in killing someone?” In answer to this second question, the questioner may be surprised to learn that the moderate muslim sitting in front of him or her favors stoning, death for apostates, death for homosexuals, death for those who insult islam, etc. etc. Never assume that the meaning you ascribe to a given vocabulary is the same meaning that a muslim ascribes to the same vocabulary. In an islamic context, IMO, it is always necessary to define terms.

Just think of the news coverage with “Al Qaeda” and “nuclear” in the headline.

On the other hand, a kid from, say India, who gets an MS or PhD from an American university can go home to status and relative prosperity. Most of them are not potential terrorists, but 20 years ago the muslims may not have been either. With such a large number being trained in fields that may not be dangerous now but could be later (eg. nanotech), there are bound to be some rotten apples.

The solution obviously isn’t more government programs and I don’t expect much from the public school system. Perhaps home schooled kids may be our best hope. I wish there was more science material in the home schooling curricula – the little I’ve seen seems to be pretty light on the hard sciences.

I fully support the Muslims who worship the G-d of the Jews who made heaven and earth, as well as us, and hope for peace.

“Switzerland: Terror cops arrest Collider scientist linked with al-Qaeda,” it said. The Collider is the largest nuclear research facility in the world.”

olright, it’s Switzerland cops that are awaking !