"An environmental truism may not be so true after all. Experts have tended to assume that a country's environmental impact–measured as pollution or resource use–swells as it gets bigger, richer, and more technologically advanced….But according to an analysis by two sociologists in the current issue of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, two factors in the equation–affluence and technology–may not always harm the environment after all."

—Find out how green alarmist Paul Ehrlich's IPAT formula falls apart when researchers, as they say, "discipline the debate with data," in the January 9 news entry at InSCIght (www.europe.apnet.comlinSCight/), a Web site operated by Science magazine and the Academic Press. This site includes highlights from Science and news from other academic sources.

"Behavioral scientists have begun to question, with increasing vigor, whether DARE is little more than a feel-good scheme of enormous proportions….For the past five years, DARE has used tactics ranging from bullying journalists to manipulating the facts to mounting campaigns in order to intimidate government officials and stop news organizations, researchers and parents from criticizing the program."

—Stephen Glass, in the March 3 New Republic, explaining why DARE remains the nation's leading drug education program. (For an earlier look at DARE's shortcomings, see "Truth or DARE," March 1995.) The text of Glass's hard-hitting piece is available on the Electronic Newsstand,