First, thank you for the feedback
I completely agree with Michael, we try to state our case with "common sense".
If we get factual arguments we will analyze and respond to them with facts.
If we get nonsense, or non-factual arguments we also try to respond with facts and logical reasoning.
We actually succeed many times, if not to convert anti-nuclear activists, at least to make them question some of the arguments they have used only by tradition, and make the debate more factual. So far mostly in blogs and on the web, but we are trying to get articles and editorials into the papers as well, and succeed from time to time.
However, having more renowned scholars is probably a good idea, and would probably carry even more weight to our arguments, as long as the arguments still are factual and you do not try to make a statement that "I am right because I do have a professors degree" etc.