49
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 10:
Line 10: + +
no edit summary
::Now do the same for the "[[ozone hole]]" and [[skin cancer]]; is there a [[ultraviolet]] link, or what? (After that, maybe you can tell us whether air temperature drives [[carbon dioxide]] or is it the other way around?) --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 22:57, 20 August 2008 (EDT)
::Now do the same for the "[[ozone hole]]" and [[skin cancer]]; is there a [[ultraviolet]] link, or what? (After that, maybe you can tell us whether air temperature drives [[carbon dioxide]] or is it the other way around?) --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 22:57, 20 August 2008 (EDT)
Who claims secondhand smoke is responsible for 20% of urban deaths? That seems way too farfetched to be a widespread belief, I would think. Are those statistics from some fringe group? Also, does anyone really doubt that secondhand smoke is harmful? ''How'' harmful is certainly debatable, but secondhand smoke is still cigarette smoke, and I didn't think ''anyone'' denied that cigarette smoke is harmful. [[User:Jaguar|Jaguar]] 23:24, 20 August 2008 (EDT)