Rezwan wrote:
../

I pointed out that statement was not accurate. There be risks and dangers. You may feel they are worth the gain, but being worth it is not the same as not existing at all.

“Nothing to fear.” You said. “Not dangerous”.

Then…finally, you acknowledged the dangers.

Although, now, you’re backtracking.

What was that word you used?

Silly.

That’s either deliberate misunderstanding, or non-deliberate misunderstanding.

Dangers are uncontrolled and unpredictable risks. Aside from Chernobyl, which was state-bungled design and management, name another nuclear plant disaster. (Three Mile Island harmed no one; even the workers inside were fine. http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf36.html) .

So the “danger” is pure extrapolation with no stats or history. I.e., fear-mongering.