>"Utter uncritical acceptance of anything hydrogen related while at the same time denying everything else." I think the GP is warning against sentiments like t

>"Utter uncritical acceptance of anything hydrogen related while at the same time denying everything else." I think the GP is warning against sentiments like this. It is really easy to declare someone who is passionate about something to have arrived at their stance due to uncritical acceptance. But, how do we actually know someone has arrived at their position because of "uncritical acceptance"? For instance, I am an advocate of nuclear energy and I'm sure many anti-nuclear folks out there believe that I have uncritically endorsed fission without thinking about the risks. But I certainly have thought about it. I am also of the opinion that the current state of renewables is in no way sufficient to actually solve our energy needs. In a way, it does sound like I am denying everything else. But I would counter that by saying I have good reason to hold that position.