I actually don't think that is a good argument either. Even with the 3 mile, Fukushima and Chernobyl disaters, more people have died falling of windmills than from nuclear power (per megawatt hour).
I think the concentration of energy (making it a good target for terrorists), and the probable long term damage of waste which has not yet been realized are better arguments, but still not good enough to have coal over nuclear in my opinion.
I agree that it is a risk worth taking. But those risks are not merely unscientific fear mongering and meed to be mitigated by more than just incredibly expensive human processes.
