Yet another religious cult raided

[--Pete]

Hi,

http://www.newsweek.com/id/131753?GT1=43002

I think the most revealing statement in that interview is (emphasis mine): ". . . I could see that my fellow directors, none of whom had any science education, were starting to deal with issues . . . on an emotional level rather than an intellectual level."

Combined with the fact that the bulk of the population (94%, IIRC, according to a Physics Today survey sometime in the late '80s or early '90s) do not distinguish nuclear weapons from nuclear energy, the 'environmentalists' were able to use lies and the fear of the unknown to derail nuclear energy for over a generation. I, too, studied these issues in the '60s and '70s. To accept nuclear now, but not then, because it has become 'safer', is a self deluding excuse. What has changed is not so much the technology as the sources of information that the 'environmentalists' are willing to consider.

Disclaimer: for lack of a better word ('idiot' is vastly overburdened), I've used 'environmentalists' (please note the quotes) to indicate those who, with more passion than knowledge or even sense, defend or oppose issues on which they are unequipped to even hold a valid opinion. The unquoted environmentalist is a useful and necessary force to protect the world from the rapaciousness of corporations and the callus indifference of governments. But it is not of that minority that I speak.

--Pete