Re: Whoops! The Atlantic Makes Trump Look EPIC In Cover Intended as a Smear

On 2024-09-25, Mike Van Pelt <usenet@mikevanpelt.com> wrote:

In article <vd1td8$3qtr8$1@dont-email.me>,
William Hyde  <wthyde1953@gmail.com> wrote:

Mike Van Pelt wrote:

The adamant opposition to nuclear power by the people who
are most gung-ho on the "Global Warming" thing unalterably
convinces me that they do not belive it themselves.

>
Actually I am strongly pro-nuclear power, as are most climate
scientists I know.

>
Good. You make ... what, the third? ... that has come to my
attention.  In the past, when I've said this, what I've gotten
from the global warming folks in the conversation is "Noooooo,
nuclear is teh evulzzz!!!"
>
One of several reasons I took "Science Friday" off of my
podcast download was that in several years of listening
to it, they had many, many overheated (heh) stories about
global warming, but never once could bring themselves to
mention nuclear in that context.  The only mention of
nuclear power I recall was one "nuclear is bad" story.

Yes.  I subscribe to _Science News_. Their silence is deafening.
Earlier this year they had a 4 page feature article going into detail
on all the different ways to move towards net-zero carbon
emissions. They didn't mention nuclear energy at all.

I don't see signs of William Hyde's climate scientists supporting
nuclear power. I see complicit ignoring of the issue like above. I see
top climatologists like Mann openly supporting censorship - opposing
scientists must not be given an opportunity to state their views. (I
don't know Mann's position on nuclear power itself, just on general
climate issues). We desperately need to debate the pluses AND minuses
of actions to combat global warming, and one side is trying to keep that
debate from happening.

Chris