Sure, pull the other one. You can't credibly debunk any of these because they've been a problem with every reactor built to date. You can pretend that they won't be a problem for any of the 'new and untried designs', however, I'm pretty sure that by the time that we build them and operate them for a couple of decades they'll turn out much the same as the previous lot, which were also supposed to be cheap, non-polluting, reliable and absolutely never subject to anything remotely like an accident.

Why people keep falling for this is a mystery to me.

Comparing with coal burning plants is nonsense, compare to wind/hydro/solar on a long enough timescale rather than to compare with the most polluting fossil fuel. That's stacking the deck in favor of nuclear.

I'm sure nuclear has its place in this whole story, but let's not pretend that it is without problems, at best it will be a stepping stone.