Antinuclear

Pro fossil fuel trolls are bad enough: pro nuclear ones are worse

Christina Macpherson My comment on  What I learned from debating science with trolls, Business Spectator MICHAEL BROWN 20 AUG

Apologies if my comment might appear to be “off the subject”, though I think that it is not. First I welcome this article, clearly showing the illogicality, if not downright dishonesty of the climate sceptic trolls.
I am constantly the victim of Twitter trollsm because I campaign against the nuclear industry. It is ironic that these trolls use climate change as their argument for nuclear power, – and accuse me constantly of being in the pay of the coal and gas companies. That’s despite the fact that I repeatedly write and publish on websites on the critical need for action to address climate change
The pro nuclear trolls use two tactics. The main one is to abuse and discredit their targeted person. Thus I am not only “in the pay” of the fossil fuel industries, I am also a “murderer” – as well as being “stupid” “evil” ignorant” and have many other unpleasant attributes.

Their second tactic is to focus on narrowly technical matters – such as the intricacies of new (though not yet existing) Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactors (LFTRs). The pretense is that this is the whole argument – the superiority of new nuclear technology. Subjects such as economics, ecology, public health, civil liberties, – these matters are “not relevant” to the discussion on nuclear power. In fact, only people with technical expertise can have a valid opinion. (Of course if  atechnicallly qualified person should oppose nuclear power , then he or she must be “in the pay” of the fossil fuel industries).  http://www.businessspectator.com.au/article/2014/8/20/policy-politics/what-i-learned-debating-science-trolls

August 22, 2014 - Posted by Christina Macpherson | Christina reviews