Then why am I slightly disappointed? I would rather scientists at CERN had not discovered the Higgs boson, the indicator of the this treacle, nor anything like it. I would rather have seen that the endeavours of all the men and women involved were in vain. Such a feeling doesn't stem from resentment or sadism but the desire for physics to undergo another radical overhaul.
Science is the attempt to prove other people wrong. We (or some great mind we claim as our own) do our best to devise theories to explain what's going on, then we test them to discover whether we were correct or not. In this case, Peter Higgs has been shown to be not wrong. The really interesting science starts, however, when something everyone thought must be the case is revealed as an illusion.
At the beginning of the 20th century, most people thought physics was almost completed. Isaac Newton's mechanics held steady, we understood thermodynamics, and we could begin a period of mastery over nature. But when Einstein explained just what gravity was, when sub-atomic particles began appearing which completely violated everything Newton said could happen, physics had to begin all over again.
Imagine, for a moment, if the Higgs boson had not been discovered. Of course, absence of evidence is not always evidence of absence, but let's suppose all our efforts suggested that such an object did not exist. What then? Momentary disappointment would quickly give way to lasting excitement. Everything we thought we knew about the basic building blocks of our world through the Standard Model would have to be rethought. The joy of intellectual endeavour generally, not just in science, comes when you undermine your assumptions and must build the tower of knowledge from the beginning on firmer foundations.
In a way, this is a disappointing result. And it could get worse. Nobel Prize winning physicist Steven Weinberg said recently