When humanity first made plans to send probes and people into space in the mid-20th Century, the issue of contamination came up. Twenty-four years earlier, scientists and officials within the US government stood at another turning point that involved a small-but-potentially-disastrous risk. Before the first atomic weapons test in 1945, scientists at the Manhattan Project performed calculations that pointed to a chilling possibility. In one scenario they plotted out, the heat from the fission explosion would be so great that it could trigger runaway fusion. In other words, the test might accidentally set the atmosphere on fire and burn away the oceans, destroying most of the life on Earth. We've all wanted the Israeli hostages to be released to their families," and aid to reach those still inside Gaza. he says.

There is no distinction between peaceful marches on either side of the debate on this issue as there wouldn't be on any other issue," he says. Trevor then asks Mr Jones about a march against antisemitism taking place in London today, and whether Labour MPs will be attending.

Lucian Rollins is on a mission to erase the stain his father left behind on their family name, starting with building an invulnerable empire. But not everything is completely impervious to outside forces, least of all Lucian when faced with a sassy small-town librarian. Pressed again on the migration data, Ms Trott says there have been "very specific circumstances" in recent years, with people arriving in the UK from Ukraine and Hong Kong. He is asked about Mr Scott's response to concerns, which was: "How do you know, you weren't there?" More concerning is the threat of nuclear weapons. A burning atmosphere may be impossible, but a nuclear winter akin to the climatic change that helped to kill off the dinosaurs is not. In WWII, atomic arsenals were not abundant or powerful enough to trigger this disaster, but now they are.

Why do we fail to treat these catastrophic risks with the gravity they deserve? Wiener has some suggestions. He describes the way that people misperceive extreme catastrophic risks as " tragedies of the uncommons". Perhaps the most troubling thing is that a tragedy of the uncommons could happen by accident – whether it's via hubris, stupidity, or neglect. But Lina has reasons for her return to town, and if those secrets come to light, Nash may never forgive her. However, Lina has no plans to plant roots, so a fling with the handsome cop is perfectly acceptable. There’s just one problem. So, what happened that led to these decisions? And what can they tell us about attitudes to the kinds of risks and crises we face today?

These are meant to be entertainment, they are not documentaries," he adds. "You're not expected to have everything absolutely accurate." She adds this is why the government took "some of the strongest action ever" in May to "bring down the numbers" by reducing the number of dependants an overseas student can bring with them. The second reason we misperceive very rare catastrophies is the "numbing" effect of a massive disaster. Psychologists observe that people's concern does not grow linearly with the severity of a catastrophe. Or to put it more bluntly, if you ask people how much they care about all people on Earth dying, it's not seven-and-half billion times more concern than if you told them one person would die. Nor do they account for the lives of future generations lost either. At large numbers, there's some evidence that people's concern even drops relative to their concerns about individual tragedy. In a recent article for BBC Future about the psychology of numbing, the journalist Tiffanie Wen quotes Mother Teresa, who said: “If I look at the mass I will never act. If I look at the one, I will." For the philosopher Toby Ord at Oxford University, that moment was a significant point in human history. He dates the specific time and date of the Trinity test – 05:29 on 16 July 1945 – as the beginning of a new era for humanity, marked by a step-change in our abilities to destroy ourselves. "Suddenly we were unleashing so much energy that we were creating temperatures unprecedented in Earth's entire history," Ord writes in his book The Precipice. Despite the rigour of the Manhattan scientists, the calculations were never subjected to the peer review of a disinterested party, he points out, and there also was no evidence that any elected representative was told about the risk, let alone any other governments. The scientists and military leaders went ahead on their own. A couple of decades beforehand, a group of scientists and military officials stood at a similar turning point. As they waited to watch the first atomic weapon test, they were aware of a potentially catastrophic outcome. There was a chance that their experiments might accidentally ignite the atmosphere and destroy all life on the planet.

Mr Roberts says this would mean all historians would have to remain engrossed in very recent history. We can be thankful that the Apollo 11 officials and Manhattan scientists were not those horrified individuals. But someday in the future, someone will arrive at another turning point where the fate of the species is theirs to decide. Or perhaps they are already on that road, hurtling towards disaster with their eyes closed. Hopefully, for the sake of humanity, they will make the right choice when their moment comes. Trevor Phillips asks about a reliance in the statement on a forecast that net migration will fall, which was almost immediately followed by news of a record high. Mr Jones says the "key thing" is that "all marches should be peaceful", and if they are, they should be able to happen.Ord also highlights that, in 1954, the scientists got a calculation staggeringly wrong in another nuclear test: instead of an expected 6 megatonne explosion, they got 15. "Of the two major thermonuclear calculations made that summer… they got one right and one wrong. It would be a mistake to conclude from this that the subjective risk of igniting the atmosphere was as high as 50%. But it was certainly not a level of reliability on which to risk our future." When the flash was longer and brighter than expected, at least one member of the team watching it thought that the worst had happened. One of those was the president of Harvard University whose initial awe rapidly turned to fear. "Not only did [he] have no confidence the bomb would work, but when it did he believed they had botched it with disastrous consequences, and that he was witnessing, as he put it, 'the end of the world'," his granddaughter Jennet Conant told the Washington Post after writing a book profiling the scientists of the project. Sloane Walton is not Lucian’s biggest fan, but their chemistry is a pesky complication that refuses to vanish. One unforgettable one-night stand later, the two can no longer deny their connection. Everything is going perfectly until questions about their future arise.