Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-11 of 11 posts in this discussion
Initial post: Oct 19, 2009 8:02:44 AM PDT
Reading about how poorly the authors researched their new book on Climate Change, apparently messing up the quotes from the real climate scientists they spoke to not only irritates this college professor who finds that sort of problem common to many weak student papers but makes me wonder about all those wonderful "supposed" insights their earlier book offered. Did they use the same weak research skills with that book as well?

Steven A. Leibo

Posted on Oct 19, 2009 10:59:09 AM PDT
Scoob Edoo says:
Wow, how about a little perspective here? Read Dubner's article in the NYT regarding the work they did with the Climate Scientists in question on this one chapter of the new book and then see if you feel the same as what was written above. The moral of the story (so far): don't believe everything you read, especially on far left- or right-wing sites with axes to grind and agendas to push.

Posted on Oct 19, 2009 8:05:21 PM PDT
I really really enjoyed this book. After reading the climate chapter I immediately wrote all my congressmen and senators to oppose cap and trade laws designed to cripple our economy and destroy our pristine wild environment with inefficient solar cells and wind mills.

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 19, 2009 9:12:46 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Oct 19, 2009 9:15:55 PM PDT
Myron D. Brockman says: "I really really enjoyed this book."

You enjoyed the book? It's not even out yet. You're just the kind of person I'd expect to be writing "all my congressmen and senators to oppose cap and trade laws."

Posted on Oct 20, 2009 9:05:10 AM PDT
Yes I love our pristine wildlands and hate to see them defaced with inefficient bird killing windmills and groundwater depleting solar cells. To speak nothing of the immense infrastructure of roads and high power lines which will be inflicted on the country. How much time do you spend out here on the prairie?

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 26, 2009 7:45:21 PM PDT
Did you write to all of your Congressmen? How'd you get all their addresses? How many do you have, by the way?

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 6, 2009 12:10:57 PM PST

Posted on Nov 11, 2009 4:58:50 PM PST
Thanks, Steven, for warning us away from this "book on climate change" ... that you didn't even read.

We're looking forward to more third-hand paraphrases of ranting bloggers from you to aid us in our reading decisions.

Posted on Nov 11, 2009 6:27:56 PM PST
Please Please don't fall for this money-grubbing poorly thought-out mess of a book. Don't support this sort of muddle-headed rabble-rousing that's masquerading as innovative academic thought.

The authors haven't even bothered with basic arithmetic in their rush to cash in and hit the TV shows as 'pundits' and 'respected experts'. Shame. Not worthy of respectable academics.

If you insist on buying this intellectually dishonest book, please at least read one well-considered response to it, such as this one:

I'm appalled that this book is getting away with manipulating the public and passing itself off as a serious and well-considered contribution to long-term policy and planning. Mr Levitt and Mr Dubner, shame on you--this is not scholarship. Please sit down and shut up.

Posted on Nov 17, 2009 10:44:11 AM PST
William says:
The book's introduction should tell you right off the bat that these two authors have strayed away from science and reasoning towards controversial statements meant to generate... well, controversy and revenue. From now on, their books should be in the fiction sections of bookstores and libraries. Advocating drunk driving in any condition borders on the side of evil. Don't tell me that the book suggests that drunk people should call a cab or hitch a ride with a friend. When someone is drunk and they're holding car keys, do you really think they're going to do anything other than drive? Shame on you Steven and Stephen. Shame.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 17, 2009 11:31:16 AM PST
I haven't read it (although I loved the original Freakonomics), but here is a question for those who did. Do the authors advocate drunk driving over drunk walking because a person is less likely to harm himself--without taking into account the likely harm to others? If so, that is incredibly irresponsible. Because there is _zero_ likelihood of killing someone else while walking drunk. I hope they don't forget to take into account the externality of killing someone else when driving drunk!
‹ Previous 1 Next ›
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in


This discussion

Participants:  9
Total posts:  11
Initial post:  Oct 19, 2009
Latest post:  Nov 17, 2009

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 1 customer

Search Customer Discussions
This discussion is about
SuperFreakonomics CD: Global Cooling, Patriotic Prostitutes, and Why Suicide Bombers Should Buy Life Insurance
SuperFreakonomics CD: Global Cooling, Patriotic Prostitutes, and Why Suicide Bombers Should Buy Life Insurance by Steven D. Levitt (Audio CD - October 20, 2009)
4.0 out of 5 stars   (737)