Joe wrote:What's your sector of law? Just out of interest.doz_magic_man wrote:I respond to global warming the same way I respond to everything, by listening to the arguments and making my own opinion. I just happen to be with the majority. As for the 9/11 thing, I was referring to the theory that explosives were used to collapse the buildings, a missile used to blast the pentagon etc but that was poorly phrased.
In law (my sector) there's always a rational argument from a minority group of lawyers regarding some point of law, it's just that they are overruled by the majority who have their own rational argument. At the end of the day, there will always be minorities who are a mixture of those who genuinely believe their viewpoint and those that revel in having an alternative point of view. It's the latter group which pisses me off.
Currently working in PI but I'm due to star my training contract with a leading national commercial firm. I'm amazed that I've managed to secure one given how competitive it is at the minute, thanks to the bankers and GDL convertees flocking to the sector like flies around shit. There just isn't enough shit to go around for the flies though.
As for the above posts, I'm not saying that the temperature is steadily and constantly rising across the board, or that there aren't anomalies. After all, we are currently experiencing the coldest snap in 12 years. However; given the fact that Antarctica is proven to be warming and there are record-sized ice sheets flaking off the Arctic I tend to support what I perceive to be the populous view. I've travelled the world and seen car fumes sitting like a blanket over an anormous area like Los Angeles and spoken to numerous people from varous countries who regailed their tails of unprecedented climactic changes. I've never disputed the fact that global warming may be in part a natural phenomenon but I can't accept that 100+ years of unnatural industrial smog gluts have had no effect on our climate.