Of course there are. But we have to pay attention to what the community is saying in general. Consensus. To be fair, this is often hard to decipher when you aren't in said community and we are talking about a rather complicated topic ("Here be Dragons"). I mean we have "climate experts" showing up on certain news channels claiming that the IPCC reports are hogwash but we have a huge consensus in the community in general.
So with the Iran deal, what do we have? Well they would have needed around 3-6mo to enrich their stockpile for enough material for a single weapon. Something they haven't done before and do not have the technology to do. Also something they did not appear to be attempting to do.
But I talked about consensus. I'd say Nature is a good source for that[0]. You'll note here that Nature is talking about getting enough enriched material in months but several other news sources I looked at used the phrase "build a weapon" instead. I'd call this fear mongering and misunderstanding the science.
I'm not trying to tell you that you're dumb, but rather that this is a complicated matter and that amateur levels of understanding aren't quite enough to even get the basics. I have a degree in the field, have worked in the industry and in energy departments. My level of understanding is barely enough to get the basics. I'm calling you out because we're talking about something extremely complicated that people vastly overestimate their expertise to handle. Atomic physics is not a simple thing where you can get a basic understanding through even months of googling.
So with the Iran deal, what do we have? Well they would have needed around 3-6mo to enrich their stockpile for enough material for a single weapon. Something they haven't done before and do not have the technology to do. Also something they did not appear to be attempting to do.
But I talked about consensus. I'd say Nature is a good source for that[0]. You'll note here that Nature is talking about getting enough enriched material in months but several other news sources I looked at used the phrase "build a weapon" instead. I'd call this fear mongering and misunderstanding the science.
I'm not trying to tell you that you're dumb, but rather that this is a complicated matter and that amateur levels of understanding aren't quite enough to even get the basics. I have a degree in the field, have worked in the industry and in energy departments. My level of understanding is barely enough to get the basics. I'm calling you out because we're talking about something extremely complicated that people vastly overestimate their expertise to handle. Atomic physics is not a simple thing where you can get a basic understanding through even months of googling.
[0] https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-00254-7