Maria D write: how much more proof do we need of nuclear energy problems

If radioactivity has proven to be a devastating life killer in Hiroshima, Nagasaki, the Marshall Islands, the Caribbean Seas, Chernobyl, to mention just a few, why is this even being raised as a question? How much proof is needed? One can get a good picture of the outcome by watching the Chernobyl documentary, and by going to http://www.nucleardarkness.org/ the website of Steven Starr, a socially responsible scientist who is also educating the public about the consequences of nuclear fallout and the destruction of the natural sacred balance of the Earth. The Earth is a living organism and radioactivity is a life killer. This is why all life would be wiped off the map, if ever a nuclear war ensued between those countries that continue to amass military power and nuclear warheads. Atomic tests have the power to tip the poles of the Earth. If this ever came to be Oceans would be taken out of their beds and all life would be annihilated. A nuclear war would, and honest scientists and government officials, in the know, are aware that it would provoke global climate change but would implode this beautiful planet that has, generously, given us life. Why do we keep on this path of war and destruction and are incredibly, insensitive to Mother Earth's plight?