SuperFreakonomics
-
![]()
![]()
Is Freeman Dyson really “brave”?
Freeman Dyson is a noted physicist who’s argued — utterly implausibly — that carbon eating trees will save us and we shouldn’t worry about the whole climate change thing. For this, he’s been profiled in The New York Times and now dubbed a Brave Thinker by the Atlantic. But is he really that brave? Said […]
-
Statisticians reject global cooling
A terrific story by the AP’s Seth Borenstein, “Statisticians reject global cooling,” not only debunks that myth — it will make your head spin once again on error-riddled Superfreakonomics (coauthored by Levitt). Have you heard that the world is now cooling instead of warming? You may have seen some news reports on the Internet or […]
-
“Global cooling” scam debunked yet again
You’ve probably heard the conservative argument that the globe is actually cooling, not warming. In fact, if you’re anything like me, you’ve probably heard it 58 gazillion times. You may have even read it in the craptacular new book Superfreakonomics. Associated Press’s Seth Borenstein decided to test it out, and he came up with a […]
-
Caldeira on Yale e360
Yale Environment 360: I want to start with this little dust-up over SuperFreakonomics. In the book, you are quoted as saying, when it comes to global warming, “Carbon dioxide is not the right villain.” Is that accurate? Ken Caldeira: That is not accurate. I don’t believe I said anything remotely like that because I believe […]
-
![]()
![]()
Greens have finally got the Big Mo
Paul Krugman had a post the other day on the “aura of inevitability” and how it finally seems to be working for progressives instead of against them. I think he’s on to something. Summer was brutal for greens. “Cap and tax” attacks were bouncing around the Foxosphere. House Dems were getting killed back home for […]
-
Coauthor of SuperFreakonomics apologizes to me
[Note: The error-riddled book is now searchable again on Amazon, so readers can confirm that all of my excerpts were correct and in context. The book has garnered a number of positive comments from (fast) readers, even on the climate chapter whose main conclusion has been rejected by its two primary scientific sources — see […]
-
Myhrvold jumps the shark — and jumps ship on SuperFreakonomics
Un-friggin-believable. Nathan Myhrvold, who Levitt and Dubner call the “polymath’s polymath” — who is one of the primary “experts” the authors rely on to make the case for their central geoengineering-only approach to global warming — has just publicly repudiated that approach. Apparently he never read the chapter — or didn’t understand it if he […]
-
Interviews support my reporting on SuperFreakonomics
Caldeira, like the vast majority of climate scientists, believes cutting carbon dioxide and other greenhouse-gas emissions is our only real chance to avoid runaway climate change. “Carbon dioxide is the right villain,” Caldeira wrote on his Web site in reply. He told Joe Romm, the respected climate blogger who broke the story, that he had […]
-
Anatomy of Debunking
UPDATE: For an independent vindication of my reporting here, see Bloomberg interview of Dubner and Caldeira backs up my reporting on error-riddled Superfreakonomics. Dubner is baffled that Caldeira “doesn’t believe geoengineering can work without cutting emissions.” I wish I didn’t have to waste valuable blogging time writing this post to set the record straight. […]
