LHC Ad: Beware Bears

You may have noticed an ad running on scienceblogs which says "Has the LHC destoyed the Earth?" If you click on it you find a webpage that says in big letters simply "NO". What's up with that? Check out the webpage source for the page (http://www.hasthelhcdestroyedtheearth.com/).

Update 9/12/08: Check out the comments for more fun and also read the cat projectile analyzers take on how you can click to save the world.

<br />br /&gt; "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd"&gt;<br /><br /><br /><title>Has the Large Hadron Collider destroyed the earth yet?</title><!-- this is the fault of daniel drucker dmd@3e.org the first person to ask for an RSS feed gets a free black hole in their junk you are too late, people have already asked. ok fine i made one. rss.xml. --><link rel="alternate" title="Has the Large Hadron Collider destroyed the&lt;br /&gt;&#10;earth yet?" href="http://www.hasthelhcdestroyedtheearth.com/rss.xml" type="application/rss+xml" /><br /><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8" /><br /><p></p> <!-- oh shit bears --><!-- [ddrucker@scatter ~]$ host -t txt freon.3e.org freon.3e.org descriptive text "Anesthetized monkeys exposed to 25,000 ppm or 50,000 ppm [of freon] for 5 minutes had [cardiac] [arrhythmia]s including [tachycardia] and decreased contractility (U.S. EPA 1983)" In their paper, Coleman and de Luccia noted: The possibility that we are living in a false vacuum has never been a cheering one to contemplate. Vacuum decay is the ultimate ecological catastrophe; in the new vacuum there are new constants of nature; after vacuum decay, not only is life as we know it impossible, so is chemistry as we know it. However, one could always draw stoic comfort from the possibility that perhaps in the course of time the new vacuum would sustain, if not life as we know it, at least some structures capable of knowing joy. This possibility has now been eliminated. The second special case ... applies if we are now living in the debris of a false vacuum ... This case presents us with less interesting physics and with fewer occasions for rhetorical excess than the preceding one. S. Coleman and F. De Luccia (1980). "Gravitational effects on and of vacuum decay". Physical Review D21: 3305. the crab always wins; it makes the baby syntacticians cry. --><p> <span style="font-weight: bold; font-size: 120pt; font-family: Arial, sans-serif;&lt;br /&gt;&#10;text-decoration: none; color: black;">NO</span></p> <!-- this is valid xhtml, biotechs --><!-- ok i have succumbed to the siren call of adding useful information to this page, here is Seed Magazine's coverage of the LHC --><p><a></a> href="http://www.seedmagazine.com/news/2008/09/large_and_in_charge.php"<br /> style="font-weight: light; font-size: 8pt; font-family: Arial, sans-serif;<br /> text-decoration: none; color: #999999;" &gt;?</p> <script type="text/javascript"> <!--//--><![CDATA[// ><!-- var gaJsHost = (("https:" == document.location.protocol) ? "https://ssl." : "http://www."); document.write(unescape("%3Cscript src='" + gaJsHost + "google-analytics.com/ga.js' type='text/javascript'%3E%3C/script%3E")); //--><!]]> </script><script type="text/javascript"> <!--//--><![CDATA[// ><!-- var pageTracker = _gat._getTracker("UA-143825-2"); pageTracker._trackPageview(); //--><!]]> </script><p><br /><br /></p>

Oh shit, bears.