Sheaf Saint

Ultimately, yes. Had he been stood on his line he would have stopped it. But how many keepers stand on their line when the opposing keeper has the ball? None.

When Stoke won the toss they opted to change ends right before KO. Therefore Boruc had no frame of reference for the conditions when that ball came at him.

Exactly. We are above them because our keeper has been much better than theirs, and he is England's #1.

Outstanding from Lallana there. Unlucky.

This. I don't hold him responsible for the goal at Stoke as he had no time at all to judge the conditions prior to it. He's been excellent and today's lapse is the only big, costly mistake he has made this season - which is a lot less than Joe Hart has made for Citeh.

Boruc what the actual f**k do you think you are doing!?

That was an incredible dribble out of our half from Rodriguez.

I assume because he is labouring under the false belief that their protest against Gazprom's drilling in the Arctic is primarily based on concern over CO2 emissions, rather than their (extremely valid, I might add) concerns about the potentially disastrous effects of a major oil spill in such a remote and inhospitable region of the planet.

Then might I suggest you learn the difference between a theory and a hypothesis

So the author of this document is completely unbiased on the issue then Let's completely ignore the Cook et. al. article of which Mr Montford so clearly disapproves (although he does acknowledge that there is a scientific consensus regarding the ability of human-induced emissions to warm the atmosphere), and look at this instead... http://scienceprogress.org/2012/11/27479/ This isn't for the purposes of an article of any kind. This was just one guy who was interested to see for himself. The 13,950 papers he refers to are publicly available if you want to repeat the search yourself.

That's all well and good, but it doesn't detract from the fact that they tried to shirk all responsibility for her death by blaming it on her. Whatever good deeds they may have done, that is simply inexcusable.

What makes you think those of us who are in favour of reducing emissions are beard-stroking, anti-nuclear types? That's a bit of a wild generalisation isn't it? On this subject we are in agreement. I firmly believe that thorium based nuclear reactors are the right way forward a part of a mixed energy policy, and it is to our shame that India is already way ahead of us in this regard. Nuclear energy has a tarnished image thanks to the events at Chernobyl and, more recently, Fukushima. Many people will point to the latter as evidence to oppose the construction of nuclear plants in the UK, conveniently ignoring the fact that it was a 40-year-old facility built on the most tsunami-susceptible coastline in the world and, as such, what happened there could never happen at a modern thorium plant in the UK. The technology exists to move us away from fossil fuel based energy production, but globally the economic conditions and the political will do not.

Something tells me you will be even more fed up in the next few decades as the world's supplies of fossil fuels diminishes further and prices rocket then. Concern over the effect on the climate isn't the only reason to switch to renewable technology you know. The UK is becoming more and more dependent on imported gas, coal and oil as our own resources dwindle, leaving us at the mercy of global market prices. And I'm struggling to work out how your Arctic graph supports your case. To me it shows that while there has been a slight increase in the minimum extent for 2013 (we've already ascertained that 2012 was a record low) the figure is still below the average to 2010.

Funny you should mention that... http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/norwegian-army-placed-on-strict-vegetarian-diet-8951722.html

I suspect not. Mainly because the majority of people who are concerned about global warming are so inclined because they are, in the main, capable of appreciating the difference between good science and bad science, such as a long-term trend versus a single year-on-year comparison.

Crystal clear to you and me buctootim. Maybe this will help him...

And so you provide a graphic from a completely discredited article in the Mail which has already been dissected and debunked a few pages back? Good for you http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astronomy/2013/09/10/climate_change_sea_ice_global_cooling_and_other_nonsense.html

He was on the Channel 4 news the other night on a video link. He was in a darkened room wearing what appeared to be a gimp mask and his voice was altered using audio effects. Absolutely bizarre.

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/international/england-v-germany-five-things-we-learnt-at-wembley-8950420.html

Kyle Walker performed better than Lallana!? Seriously!?

Spectacularly wide of the mark as usual George. Your condescending attitude towards that which you blatantly do not understand is getting very tedious now. It has long been known that the lack of accurate temperature data for the Arctic region was a problem for climate-modelling. The simple reason being that the Arctic was a notoriously difficult area to place recording equipment. It is the drastic loss of ice (caused by - guess what.... yep, you guessed right: global warming) that has now made it much easier to access the region and put the necessary equipment in place to gain more accurate readings.

Wowser! I reckon SRL might have to resign as chief FK taker for Saints if he keeps this up.

Imagine how much worse it would have been if Germany had fielded their first team.

Sturridge has been crap tonight. Roy said before the game he wouldn't play 90 minutes so how the hell is h still on the pitch?

Brilliant Roy, just brilliant. You get the chance to see how Rickie and Adam can link up for England but you replace one with the other instead.