“Leading by example” | Quentin Parker on Nuclear energy

Red Box, memo to Quentin Parker: no it was not because of the need for nuclear weapons that nuclear energy was not developed. It was because the Greens, and Greenpeace in particular, lobbied against nuclear power. They remain so to this day. Which in my mind calls into question their "Climate emergency" concerns. You can't be worried by climate change and argue against the best, safest, carbon-free source of energy. It's cognitive dissonance of the first order. 

Highlighted: note Parker's only slightly hidden admiration of dictatorship. Dictators can give us thorium reactors quicker!

Also: electric cars. Have a look at the EVs China is making and tossing aside, here. 

China thorium my earlier post.  There I note that the reason given for not going ahead with Thorium reactor development in the US, way back in the 1960s, was “shifting priorities” (Where above it’s “needs of nuclear weapons “). Again, it was not that. It was the Greens. It seems that noone is able to say what is the provable truth: that it was scare campaigning by Greenpeace -- remember the banners draped on freeway overpasses, and all the stunts -- together with scare movies like “China Syndrome”, that did indeed scare people off nuclear. The Greens scared people off nuclear and continue to scare people off nuclear. The Australian Conservation Foundation is staunchly anti-nuclear. Even as a recent Australian ABC online survey found that 62% agreed with the statement:  “Australia should develop nuclear power”.