<html><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><div><div>From:</div><blockquote type="cite"><div><br><a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8223611.stm">http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8223611.stm</a></div></blockquote></div><div><br></div><blockquote type="cite"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: verdana; font-size: 22px; color: rgb(70, 70, 70); line-height: 31px; ">Species are going extinct at perhaps 1,000 times the normal rate</span></blockquote><br><div>That's a really really interesting statistic. It would be even more interesting if I had some reason to believe it's true. My rule of thumb is to be suspicious of any article that uses the word "normal" without further elaboration. </div><div><br></div><div><blockquote type="cite"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: verdana; font-size: 22px; color: rgb(70, 70, 70); line-height: 31px; ">Soils are becoming saline, air quality is a huge cause of illness and premature death </span></blockquote><br></div><div>Everyone agrees that bad air is, well, bad; but is it really a HUGE cause of death? If so it's odd that in no place has the the air gotten worse than in China, and yet in no place has the life expectancy increased more. I think that means that some things are worse than bad air, like no food.</div><div><br></div><div> John K Clark </div></body></html>