Tuesday, October 27, 2009

SuperFreakanomics   [Greg Pollowitz]

Bret Stephens in today's WSJ discusses the hubbub over the new book by Steven Levitt and Stephen Dubner, SuperFreakanomics:

. . . Also smart are University of Chicago economist Steven Levitt and writer Stephen Dubner, whose delightful "SuperFreakonomics" — the sequel to their runaway 2005 bestseller "Freakonomics" — gives Myhrvold and Co. pride of place in their lengthy chapter on global warming. Not surprisingly, global warming fanatics are experiencing a Pinatubo-like eruption of their own.

Mr. Gore, for instance, tells Messrs. Levitt and Dubner that the stratospheric sulfur solution is "nuts." Former Clinton administration official Joe Romm, who edits the Climate Progress blog, accuses the authors of "[pushing] global cooling myths" and "sheer illogic." The Union of Concerned Scientists faults the book for its "faulty statistics." Never to be outdone, New York Times columnist Paul Krugman scores "SuperFreakonomics" for "grossly [misrepresenting] other peoples' research, in both climate science and economics."

In fact, Messrs. Levitt and Dubner show every sign of being careful researchers, going so far as to send chapter drafts to their interviewees for comment prior to publication. Nor are they global warming "deniers," insofar as they acknowledge that temperatures have risen by 1.3 degrees Fahrenheit over the past century.

But when it comes to the religion of global warming — the First Commandment of which is Thou Shalt Not Call It A Religion — Messrs. Levitt and Dubner are grievous sinners. They point out that belching, flatulent cows are adding more greenhouse gases to the atmosphere than all SUVs combined. They note that sea levels will probably not rise much more than 18 inches by 2100, "less than the twice-daily tidal variation in most coastal locations." They observe that "not only is carbon plainly not poisonous, but changes in carbon-dioxide levels don't necessarily mirror human activity." . . .

What's particularly amusing is that both Krugman and Levitt/Dubner are bloggers for the New York Times.  As Joseph Lawler pointed out at the American Spectator blog, "They can't both be right; one or the other must have seriously misrepresented someone's views. I'm guessing that the Times usually holds its columnists to a higher standard. But I'd hate to be the editor tasked with sorting this one out."  

Dubner responded to Krugman's attack here.

10/27 11:30 AMShare