Its' not really the same thing though as Chernobyl was a poorly built first generation nuclear power plant maintained by Ukrainian farm workers with no training.
His predictions may wall have been based on second generation power plants which were being built at the time of the Chernobyl disaster. These reactors are unable to sustain a reaction if problems occur and as such do have an extremely low possibility of failure.
The predictions being made about the LHC are being made by real scientists about a specific installation, and there is every reason to believe they're right.

MM - Actually, he was interviewed about 10 years after Chernobyl, and was reminded about that very statement he made at the lecture. He responded that he was foolish and naive, and that if he knew then what he knows now he would not have given nuclear power justification. Apparently, he was not as impressed with the second generation design reactors.

And, by the way, he is a real scientist - a PhD in Nuclear Physics.

Medical doctors, Physicists, Chemists and Biologists are all scientists of one ilk or another, but many of them are regrettably lacking in the ability to correctly interpret statistics. It's a common problem in the sciences, and incidentally, one of my pet peeves.

Push the sample into the resonance core.

Shutting down... attempting shutdown... it's not... it's not shutting down!

To put it into lehman's terms, a rap about the LHC

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j50ZssEojtM

I hope he doesn't accept cheese on shopping carts from this man.

FUCK

He's what you call an interdimensional contracter

Shit, maybe I should buy a crowbar :chatter

I wish Gabby GaGa was here to tell us what she thinks.

What? About how hot hell is?