[mimixco]

I'm writing a book about nuclear power bit this isn't it. I'm tired of HN folks whining "Where is that from?" A modicum of Google will bear out everything I've said.

[jobigoud]

I'm sensible to these issues but I find most people have already strongly held opinions about the topic and very thick filter bubbles.

How do you intend to approach your book so that it's read by anyone not already convinced?

[mimixco]

You're right. Also, there are industry trolls who do stuff like derail online conversations and downvote logical arguments.

My book is a scathing exposé about the entire con job of nukes, from the promise of "power too cheap to meter" (that was a good one, huh?) to "radiation might be safe" and other nonsense.

One reason I get so pissed off at these trolls is that I've accumulated over 250,000 pages of documents, some of them from my own Freedom of Information Act requests. It's taken an enormous amount of work to be sure that I had original souce materials for everything I write, and I don't mean a Wikipedia article. One unique facet of the book is that every single claim I make is backed up by full and original quotes with sources, many of them from the industry itself.

Have you ever noticed that a post like mine will immediately be slammed with "show me sources!" but the original poster's outrageous claims like "nobody died" are met with blanket acceptance? How can the person who wrote that article say there was no meltdown at Three Mile Island? Jesus, even Wikipedia has that right. Yet no one questions them. This is trolling at it's finest.