I think we’re in danger of monopolising the issue. I am not denying things like the immobility to nuclear for a role, but it’s multifaceted, so to say this is solely because of energy direction is too simplistic.
Also, those who have flaws in their work won’t be without controversy. You can’t just dismiss criticism because it comes from many sources.
Contrarianism does not equal greater credibility. I have seen this claim come often from many, including on here (alcazar a prime culprit). The idea that those who are on the side of a majority position or mainstream position are somehow being gullible sheep. As if you’re being a radical free thinker for being different, it means you’re thinking outside the box. It doesn’t. Blindly rejecting more mainstream opinion for some fringe view is as illogical and gullible as blindly trusting anything someone says.
I am not stating you are doing this here, but it’s worth bearing in mind when praising people because they go against a more common position. It doesn’t automatically put you in some enlightened position or make critics wrong.
