> There is nothing in the natural environment that can cause cancer.

Except naturally occurring cell mutation, specialisation and growth?

The argument itself seems somewhat feasible if formulated to say that something about modern life drastically increases the occurrence of cancers. The data seems to suggest that one popular counterargument, that people tended to die of something else before cancer got a chance (since the risk seems to grow as a person ages), is not valid. The data set is still not quite large nor heterogenous enough to be enough evidence on its own.