Is Proof of Dark Matter Worth the Risk?

As CERN veers further out of control, this could be your last chance to hold your own in a debate on particle physics research.
Scan this DW article:
http://www.dw.de/cern-large-hadron-collider-restarts-with-redoubled-energy/a-18309912

A shifting of funds for particle research to something with safer and greater utility for humanity should receive more support. Just maybe, a presenter or two at ICCF19 mid-April conference will chastise the UN's IAEA for not showing leadership in this matter. Given the emerging LENR alternative, assisting more countries to set up nuclear energy plants is no longer a sensible UN goal.

An out-of-control incident at CERN could trigger earth tremors rupturing many of Europe's atomic reactors and radio-active waste storage facilities. See the January 2010 MIT article making a case for reasoned argument.
http://www.technologyreview.com/view/417008/the-case-of-the-collider-and-the-great-black-hole/
Just because engineering, mental and financial resources are available doesn't mean that "science for sience's sake" has to be pushed beyond sensible limits.

Why risk melt-down on a grand scale? Where is the utility? Where is reason?

As evidenced by Chernobyl and Fukushima disasters, physicists and engineers are not infallible. On the current scale of particle research, there is no such thing as fail-safe experimentation. The design of progressively larger and larger nuclear and particle exploration has to end.

Take a look at what Romania, a small country, is attempting in plasma accellerator research. No glory seekers here chasing God particles; just practical research. An excerpt from Worldenergymag: "...with the CETAL inauguration, new prospects for high-level research would emerge, such as applications in physics, chemistry, biology, medicine, energy, the science of materials, ultra-advanced production technologies, which would have a significant impact for the Romanian economy."
In internationally funded nuclear and particle research, scaling back should be the operating words.


Update # 1
Unlike CERN, the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER) launched in 1985 at least had a utility goal. However, after on-going injection of billions it is now grasping for life-lines to show energy production sometime after 2027. See Spectrum IEEE article of March, 20th 2015.
Solving radio-active and fossil fuel problems too late is no solution. In view of affordable and cleaner alternatives with prospects of much earlier delivery dates, some of the nations contributing to the ITER fiscal black hole will finally cut-bait.

Public apathy is mute endorsement of CERN risks and of ITER fiscal folly ...while industry lobbists encourage political inertia and advertising-supported big media shun their responsibilities.

Update # 2
PhysicsToday magazine comments on Australian research on the inteplay of deep earth forces and surface processes in the jittery motion of Earth's tectonic plates.
Unfortunately, the researchers haven't got around to speculating about the surface triggers of current tectonic plate shifts; they are still attempting to model what happened over 200 million years ago.

Update #3
AXIL's IDEA, brought to us via EGO OUT blog of April 6th, 2015:

"CERN reported today that proton beams were successfully pushed around the LHC in both directions after a two-year shutdown following a major refit described as a Herculean task that doubled its power -- and its reach into the unknown.

But mark this well, the unknown will no longer be found there in the vast wastelands that lay at higher energies, but rather new discovery is better found inside in the humble confines of the dog bone."

Update # 4

Hank Mills, compares the immediate low cost benefits of Industrial Heat's 1MW E-cat reactor with the ever-climbing expense of the ITER project now estimated to show over-unity results after 2027.
http://www.e-catworld.com/2015/04/29/e-cat-cold-fusion-reactor-shames-thousand-ton-iter-electromagnet-hank-mills/#comments

Update # 5

See ITER critique by Dr. Robert L. Hirsch, former Director of US Atomic Energy Commission in 2015 summer edition of Science and Technology.

http://issues.org/31-4/fusion-research-time-to-set-a-new-path/
"[ITER]...fusion power will almost certainly be a commercial failure... A very sad state of affairs in regards to the loss of human resources which could be used to develop renewable energies and LENR."

Update Oct 7, 2015
While generously funded CERN and ITER continue to splurge, security of existing nuclear facilities is neglected:
http://spectrum.ieee.org/energywise/telecom/security/nuclear-cybersecurity-woefully-inadequate