This paper examines how the LHC Safety Assessment Group (LSAG) report of 2008 became the central institutional reference used to dismiss scientific dissent and legal challenges regarding potential existential risks of the Large Hadron Collider. We analyse the treatment of prominent critics such as Otto Rössler, Walter Wagner, Luis Sancho and others, and discuss the broader implications for scientific debate, institutional authority, and the application of the precautionary principle when dealing with high-stakes experiments. The analysis highlights kinematic and theoretical weaknesses in the LSAG report and raises questions about how existential risks should be evaluated in high-energy physics. This work is part of a broader research program on Systolic Mathematics and Geometric Topology 14D developed over 18 years of independent research. **Preprint version** — June 21, 2026.
Jorge Luiz Silva de Barcellos (Sun,) studied this question.