> I though my argument was clear - that you need back-up for nuclear power also? Right, but who said otherwise? Your arguing against a straw man that doesn't e

> I though my argument was clear - that you need back-up for nuclear power also? Right, but who said otherwise? Your arguing against a straw man that doesn't exist, no one said: you never have to do maintenance on Nuclear. Clearly Nuclear is 100x more reliable than Solar/Wind, easily. > you'd still need back-up. who said otherwise......... who are you arguing against? not making sense... this isn't relevant to what I'm saying.. > But anyway, I find your tone overly aggressive. So it's unlikely that any discussion will be productive. fair enough! would appreciate you admitting you grossly misinterpreted the stats on the nuclear data you gave. seems bad faith. have a good one