What the pro-nuclear activists are up against

These people can sound so reasonable and persuasive.  Many people can be and will be taken in by it.

Why link to them, then?  Why even bother with them?

Because you are going to have to do battle against them.  I'd say the odds of beating them are not very good.  They've got the media, the "educational" system, and most of the political system.  As for the opposition to them in Congress, what opposition?

Actually, those guys are trying to talk the language of the left in order to gain their support.  Good luck with that.

It may not get too far with the so-called right, either.

That pretty much sums it up right there.

Update:

Actually, from what I've seen of the anti-nuke arguments, there hasn't been any good ones. But this may be an exception. One bit of warning about it, though. The kind of argument that you can expect from the left---there's a lot of ad hominem attacks in this. Actually, I'd like to see an objective anti-nuke that isn't larded with political commentary. Unfortunately, this one is not innocent of that, but it does at least make an attempt at a technical critique.

Update:

I had to update this once again.  I stopped reading at the summary or conclusion part.  So, I went back and found something that I can't let go by.  He is trying to say that the LFTR won't be any more cleaner than LWRs because it will probably not be as efficient.  I find that to be a bit of a stretch to put it mildly.  The Thorium guys have to be off by a mile for that to be close to being true.  Since Weinberg liked it better than the LWR that he invented himself, I figure the Molten-Salt reactor can't be too bad.