Did you look at any of my references? Quoting from [1] above: > The 400-page report, due to be released later this week, also describes a darkening mood at the

Did you look at any of my references? Quoting from [1] above: > The 400-page report, due to be released later this week, also describes a darkening mood at the prime minister’s residence as a series of hydrogen explosions rocked the plant on March 14 and 15. It says Mr. Kan and other officials began discussing a worst-case outcome if workers at the Fukushima Daiichi plant were evacuated. This would have allowed the plant to spiral out of control, releasing even larger amounts of radioactive material into the atmosphere that would in turn force the evacuation of other nearby nuclear plants, causing further meltdowns. > The report quotes the chief cabinet secretary at the time, Yukio Edano, as having warned that such a “demonic chain reaction” of plant meltdowns could result in the evacuation of Tokyo, 150 miles to the south. > “We would lose Fukushima Daini, then we would lose Tokai,” Mr. Edano is quoted as saying, naming two other nuclear plants. “If that happened, it was only logical to conclude that we would also lose Tokyo itself.” The Japanese PM. The Chief Cabinet Secretary. A team of 30 university professors, lawyers and journalists who interviewed more than 300 people, including top nuclear regulators and government officials in preparing a 400 page report. All support what I said. Yet you dismiss it as 'nonsense' and 'alarmism'. Please tell me why I should not instead dismiss you as being an apologist for the legacy uranium powered nuclear industry, stuck in a mindset of denialism.