You could entertain the possibility that the reason they are dedicated to eliminating all nuclear power is because they have seen information like that. You can

You could entertain the possibility that the reason they are dedicated to eliminating all nuclear power is because they have seen information like that. You can't know a posteriori, of course, but there are actually people who try to make a judgement upon facts. That doesn't mean there aren't arbitrary judgement calls made as part of that decision, of course. Ultimately you have to judge whether you think more expensive power is a worse outcome than the small risk of making a large area somewhere around a nuclear plant uninhabitable, for example. Those are based on values and can't really be decided by facts. So, another analogy would be: Imagine a journalist who is known for speaking out against nuclear power. Asking him for his reasons, he responds: "I've covered the nuclear industry for my entire life, and I've seen the coverups. Those that calculate the risks of nuclear power don't really know how close we've been to disaster many times, and I've come to the conclusion that we can't trust for-profit companies with managing the small risk of real disaster." Would your opinion of him be strengthened, or would you assume that he made up his mind beforehand and only went looking for facts that supported his belief?