rendelharris

The loan would only be to cover the fees though, woudn't it - no subsistence? Open University well worth looking at if you'd like to pursue studies from home.

Rather well said Louisa, I'm completely atheist and have absolutely no belief in ghosts whatsoever, but it does seem odd that the belief that a chap 2000 years ago was the son of God, or that a chap in the desert 1400 years ago had a direct line to the Almighty, is OK but other non-approved manifestations of the supernatural are unacceptable!

Do the drivers/guards have access to the onboard LED (or whatever it is) information boards? Sounds as though a big capital letter "PLEASE NOTE THIS TRAIN WILL NOT STOP AT DENMARK HILL" would have saved DL and others a lot of bother.

dbboy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Will be for ambulances that are on blue light and > bound for Kings. They can nip down Copleston and up Avondale Rise - not ideal but I wouldn't have thought it'd add more than a minute, really.

DulwichFox Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > You should NOT refill plastic water bottles. It > says this very clearly on the label. > > 'Do NOT reuse bottle or cap' > > As the Bottle ages and gets squeezed it cracks > inside and chemicals can leach into the contents. > Also washing the bottle can make this problem > worse and there is a serious risk of contamination > from bacteria. > > The proposed water refill scheme is seriously > flawed. No it's not, the idea is that we all invest in a refillable sports bottle (from about a quid) and use that, nobody's suggesting continually refilling single use bottles. It's a splendid idea which if (and given funding cuts etc I have a feeling it might be a big if) properly funded could make a real difference to London's pollution footprint.

Vaseline to keep it moist, bandage/plaster over and replace regularly - if it heals without scabbing it won't scar so much. Always used on rugby cuts and only the ones which needed stitching now show!

(ETA in reply to DL - Loz's usual positive contribution neither requires nor deserves answering) Can we have a trade-off? I'd be quite happy to undertake a CBT for cyclists if it was also made a compulsory part of the driving test to spend half a day cycling with an instructor. Programmes which have taken HGV drivers out on bicycles have had notably good effects, and on a personal level I've noticed that since my wife became a motorcyclist and then a cyclist her observation of and care towards two wheeled road users when driving her car (which was pretty good to start with, to be honest) has definitely improved.

tomskip Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I'm not victim blaming I hope but there are times > when a passenger in a car might not think it was > necessary to look behind them when opening the car > door. There's no time when anyone in a car shouldn't check behind them before opening a door! Whether a cyclist/motorcyclist or even pedestrian should or should not be there, they might be, err on the side of caution for your own sake (a friend had her wrist broken by a filtering motorcyclist ? insurance companies decided 50-50, she should have looked more closely, he shouldn't have gone so fast into a too narrow gap).

DulwichLondoner Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > If I am about to turn left and there is a bicycle > behind me, I signal with my end to make sure the > genius has seen me and doesn't try to undertake me > the moment I slow down to turn left (a constant > occurrence). Leaving aside the alarming vision of you signalling with your end (!), when I was motorcycling if I was turning left and there was a cyclist near enough to become a potential hazard as I slowed for the corner I would slow well beforehand and let them go ahead, making my turn behind them and obviating the risk of turning into them. It doesn't take much time and eliminates the risk.

I am continually amazed by the plethora of arrogant prats in vehicles far too large for their needs stinking up Dulwich with carcinogenic fumes in order to make unnecessary journeys and putting pedestrians and cyclists, who are probably actually just going about their daily business rather than trying to be "Earth Mums and Dads," in danger. Takes all sorts.

For those for whom this is an issue, an article on telling the difference here: https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/shortcuts/2018/jan/24/how-to-tell-if-faux-fur-is-actually-real

moondancer Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- how many times do we have to turn > out of the store when the bus has just left, and a > long cold wait until the next one ?? I agree the service is terrible on that route, but the TfL bus app is pretty accurate, so if you keep an eye on the next arrival as you shop it should make it easier to be there when it arrives. In no way excuses the service though.

No idea if it was the case in this instance but schools at dropping off time are very hairy places for cyclists as kids tend to erupt from cars on both sides without looking. It'd be very helpful if drivers could keep childproof locks/central locking on until they'd checked themselves, then let the kids out. Hope this rider's OK.

My sister has one which she rescued from a gamekeeper (long story - it caught its paw in one of his illegal traps, she found and took it to the RSPCA, he couldn't claim the dog back without admitting to setting illegal traps so she asked if she could keep it and they agreed). Lovely dog, very affectionate, very loyal. Just be prepared to give it very, very long walks (my brother-in-law runs marathons and it'll go on a fifteen mile training run with him no problems) and train it very well to return; don't know if it's her past or characteristic of the breed but if this one sees a bird half a mile off she's off to investigate - she always comes back but you can be waiting some time!

Think it was www.opentraintimes.com Not having a go at you, I hope you realise, just offering a possible explanation as it would seem very odd for a train just to skip a scheduled stop - wouldn't it hit the train in front? Maybe a perfect storm of f@$&ups, with the 19.34 leaving later than the 19.37 and someone on the 19.37 pressing the wrong button (if that's what they do) for the onboard info, choosing the via Denmark Hill button? Just looked at another site which should tell you which train you were on: it doesn't do departure times, but yesterday the 19.34 arrived in Gillingham at 20.48 and the 19.37 arrived at 20.33.

Don't want to be patronising but as you say it was a few minutes late, is there a chance you got the wrong train? You see, there's the 19.34 to Gillingham which does stop at Denmark Hill, then the 19.37 to Gillingham which doesn't stop until Bromley - I've jumped on the latter before assuming it was the 19.34 being late... ETA Looking up a geek train website (too much time on my hands) the 19.34 didn't leave until 19.46 yesterday, 12 minutes late, so if your train was only a few minutes late does look as though you accidentally got on the 19.37.

DaveR Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Do you really think you're the only person who > could wheel out dead relatives, or are you the > only one so pathetically desperate to pursue your > idiotic point from the moral high ground that you > are willing to throw it in here, an online > discussion about furry coats? Says the person who calls those who protest against "furry coats" fascists.

(ETA replying to John L, not the subsequent defensive drivel) The AIHTS, while banning steel jaw leg trapping (i.e. the classic spiked trap) still allows leg trapping and states that "80% of animals must not show any signs of poor welfare" ("poor welfare" means no self-mutilation, excessive immobility, fractures, severance of tendon or ligament, severe external haemorrhage, internal haemorrhage, skeletal muscle degeneration, spinal cord injury, severe internal organ damage, amputation and death). Bad luck for the other 20% of course...also these standards are, in practice, impossible to police in the wild. If people want to wear fur that's up to them, but any claim it doesn't involve cruelty or suffering is absurd.

Well, Starbucks sell breakfast, rolls, cakes, snacks, lunch and coffee - thought that was what Gails do? Never been in there so apologies if I've misconstrued their offer. Point remains, whatever they sell, that on ?45k a week and standard profit margins they'll be making around ?800k profits p.a., which sounds unlikely for a small bakery in their location. If I'm wrong good luck to them and wish I had a piece of their business!

The average Starbucks turns over around ?20k a week, so...assuming standard profit margins ?45k a week for Gails would mean over a million a year gross profits - knock off ?200k for staff and overheads and it'd still be an astonishing little goldmine!

DaveR Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I'm similarly unkeen on being lectured by the > EDF's resident bleeding heart PITA who thinks c&p > from an online dictionary gives him the upper > hand. Ah, insults instead of argument, pretty much as expected. I couldn't care less about your insulting me, but loosely chucking the term fascist at people and groups with whom you happen to disagree is pathetic. Several of my family died fighting real fascism, do grow up and find some arguments instead of tasteless and meaningless insults.

NorfolkNchance Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > DulwichSal Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > This place is an accident waiting to happen. > > Accidents don't just happen, they're normally > caused by bad driving, you can't blame a road > layout for accidents.....drive carefully and you > wont crash, its quite simple really. Good point - went through there several times at the weekend both on a bike and in a car; if drivers can't figure out that coming from Turney Road into Court Lane they're supposed to go to the left of the traffic lights they really shouldn't be allowed on the road. I think it's all pretty unnecessary and doesn't seem to have made things any better, but it's only dangerous if people don't concentrate. What I do think is silly is having a large traffic light for cyclists; cyclists are used to having eye-level small lights, leave the big lights for motorists - when I was sitting in the car I was asking Mrs.H why she didn't go until she pointed out that the big light was for cyclists, in the rain I'd just assumed it was for cars and hadn't noticed the cycle shaped lights. I can see that causing confusion. The most annoying thing about it is that as one leaves Court Lane to turn left up Village Way one hits a section of rutted potholed tarmac that's been there for years and could have been specially designed to unbalance cyclists just pushing off. This could have been sorted in a day for the cost of labour and a couple of bobs' worth of tarmac and that would have been of far more benefit to cyclists than all the rest of these works combined!

DaveR Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I'm b*ggered if I'm going to be > lectured by super-vegan fascists. Fascism: a governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism. If that's what PETA have planned we'd better let the government and security forces know. If, on the other hand, they're just well-intentioned if occasionally a bit silly peaceful animal rights advocates, perhaps you need to think about chucking such ridiculous terms around.

Alan Medic Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Ok. I've set it up based on last year which means > you guys should get invitations to play as should > the others who played. Let me know if you do > please. Have had and signed up Alan, thanks.

Cardelia Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I'm curious. CO2 is also part of the "natural > self-regulation of the biosphere" (see GCSE > chemistry, the carbon cycle etc.) but obviously > human activities have increased the amount of CO2 > in the atmosphere. So anthropogenic CO2 is a > pollutant, which as a definition is fine with me. > > However, if you consider anthropogenic CO2 to be a > pollutant, where do you stand on anthropogenic > water vapour? Is that a pollutant as well? You could call it a pollutant if you wish but as 99.999% of the water vapour in the earth's atmosphere is from non-anthropogenic sources I think we can agree that pollutant or not, anthropogenic water vapour is pretty unimportant. It's pretty meaningless to call water vapour a pollutant when it is part of a natural cycle, you might as well say oxygen is a pollutant when it enters water. The thing is, water vapour does not control the earth's temperature, it is controlled by the temperature; as anthropogenic gases (CO2, methane, NOx and methane) are released into the atmosphere they cause temperatures to rise, which increases the amount of water vapour, which increases the greenhouse effect. Remove the anthropogenic pollutants and (eventually) water vapour levels will rebalance. Water vapour is much loved by climate change deniers because they can claim it's nature, not humans, causing global warming - which is like claiming it was the wall that caused the crash, not the fact that I drove my car into it. P.S. Of course CO2 is part of the natural self-regulation of the biosphere, and it would work pretty well without our interference, but our production of CO2 has wrecked that natural balance, so that a rise of 100ppm which would normally occur over 20,000 years has occurred in the last 120.