Add that to the fact that in the face of argument, humans have a tendency to buckle down; if someone believes in something, any argument generally strengthens the belief.

I’ve actually changed my parent’s minds about nuclear energy, so it’s not as if changing people’s minds is impossible. I’ve found the argument tactics that work for me are as follows:

1) Don’t present the idea as an adversarial position. Talk about something you’re genuinely interested in; not because they have the opposite view, but because you want to talk about it.
2) Don’t push. If someone is getting defensive, it means they’re starting to dig in, and all you succeed in doing if you continue is to make yourself the bad guy.
3) Mention your opinion if the situation comes up, but let the subject drop if other people don’t want to talk about it. If, on the other hand, they ask you about it, answer honestly and completely.

Obviously, as someone who professes rationalism, I’d like to think that I am swayed by good argument alone. I have to admit though, that, even knowing my biases, I’m much more likely to be swayed in engaging conversation than in argument.

Unfortunately many people are put off by some of the more unbelievable claims by enthusiasts.

according to wolfram the correct probability seem to me 19e-5, or 0.019% .

Definitely a useful technique, though.

More than that, I think even the baby boomer generation is reexamining the idea of nuclear power. Now that we’re finally discovering how harmful coal can be, it’s seeming more and more reasonable.