leicsmac

All comes down to the humidity of the air. Arid air (like in deserts) cannot hold the heat of the sand or the sun at nighttime, so it radiates away pretty quickly. And I'm sure those good men did what they did so that people could live in a more comfortable world where other people wouldn't have to suffer, in the heat or otherwise, as they did.

Not a bad day, all round.

On the general topic being discussed, this is still an unpopular opinion: Oh, and it's responsible for a truly massive level of unnecessary death and suffering.

Don't expect any British singles player to last to week 2. Seems like the bad old days are here again.

...the alternative, of course, being continued use of oil and gas for energy generation and joining some of the nations of the world in a communal race to the bottom where everyone loses and days like the past few we've had will seem like a pleasant memory. So, I guess, people will have to pick their worst case poison.

Oh, Emilio, you really didn't have to play at that.

Archer being a mite sadistic here, targeting the rabbit with stuff that will hit him.

Shows what I know This might only actually be a vaguely par total on this pitch for NZ, and there's plenty of time for a result.

... top inverse mockers mate.

Not conclusive enough by itself to overturn, imo. If it had been given not out it would have been right to stay not out. But yes, we'll agree to disagree here.

The people you speak of in that "morality wall" didn't make this matter so polarised in the first instance. Yes, nuance is important, but it's also important to recognise when the lines have been very clearly drawn, either by oneself or someone else. That, unfortunately, is the world we currently inhabit. NB. I have precious little doubt that you're right and the vast majority, if not all, of the people here are not truly anti migration and do not want an ethnostate. However, again unfortunately, they are not the ones speaking the loudest and therefore setting the tone for policy discussion, and so that is what everyone might still get.

You do, but it looks like those angles wouldn't have been conclusive enough to overturn either. The DRS umpire is definitely guilty of pulling the trigger too hastily but he's not made the incorrect decision as a result, imo.

Agree with it being inconclusive, so in light of that the original decision should stand, and did.

And now it does look like it brushed the glove wristband, according to the Sky Sports analysis. In that case, enough uncertainty that you have to stick with the on field decision? It's not a good look for DRS but it doesn't tend to have many incidents like this.

Stone dead, should have been given without the review.

Fair slice of luck for O'Rourke so far this morning.

Yeah, fair point. It's a statistical fact that this government has reduced the crossings of such boats, but clearly that's also only one part of the overall thing that people are talking about and/or want.

Right (though I can imagine the practical logistics might take a little work), which is why the debate mostly isn't about that.

And such self interested sentiment could simply be written off as "human nature" or somesuch and simply be an academic cause of debate, except for the reasonably clear fact now that such self interest will result in circumstances that will get a very great deal of life, up to and including human civilisation itself, killed.

Not quite, but it is into miracle territory.

And let's not forget that particular can of worms will end up in vastly increased instances of migration as people abandon vast areas of land that become simply uninhabitable through lack of food, potable water and conflict over what meagre supplies of both that are left.

The Danes have had their share of hotheads for a while now. I remember Paludan. Of course it is. Drill past the rhetoric, the platitudes about "legitimate concerns", and that is what it has always been about. Enforced, enclaved ethnostates. The "moderates" are there for show - in the end, it won't be them running it. Now, if someone wants to say that is a better way for humanity to live then that's between them and their own conscience (though there are a few obviously apparent logical reasons as to why it's not), but some basic honesty of purpose from those wanting it would be appreciated, to be honest.

And the whole 1948-1993 era in South Africa was what, exactly, Don? Good strong governance?