Further to the somewhat heated discussion we all had a few weeks back, I came across this, the other day, on io9:
Accompanying which magnificence, a pull-quote from "Apples and Oranges," an article published in The Annals of Improbable Research in which Scott Sandford argues that it is not so difficult as one might presume to compare the hateful fruits in question. I give you his findings.
From which it is clear, at least in terms of the respective levels of infrared transmission of the monstrous orange and the evil apple, that the latter - much to my surprise - wins out.
Apples, thus, are better than oranges.
If push had come to shove, a couple of weeks ago, I'd have put my money on the orange, if I'm honest. Shows what an eejit I've been!