SuperFreakonomics isn’t even on sale yet, and the attacks on our chapter about global warming are already underway.
A prominent environmental blogger has attacked us. A well-known environmental-advocacy group pressured NPR into reading a statement critical of the book at the end of an interview I had given on Scott Simon‘s Weekend Edition show. Even Paul Krugman and Brad DeLong got in on the action before they’d even read the book.
We are working on a thorough response to these critics, which we hope to post on the blog in the next day or two. The bottom line is that the foundation of these attacks is essentially fraudulent, as we’ll spell out in detail. In the meantime, let us just say the following.
Like those who are criticizing us, we believe that rising global temperatures are a man-made phenomenon and that global warming is an important issue to solve. Where we differ from the critics is in our view of the most effective solutions to this problem. Meaningfully reducing global carbon emissions has proven to be difficult, if not impossible. This isn’t likely to change, for the reasons we discuss in the book. Consequently, other approaches represent a more promising path to lowering the Earth’s temperature. The critics are implying that we dismiss any threats from global warming; but the entire point of our chapter is to discuss global-warming solutions, so obviously that’s not the case.
The statements being circulated create the false impression that our analysis of the global-warming crisis is ideological and unscientific. Nothing could be further from the truth.
and 
. You can also watch it on 
“SuperFreakonomics isn’t even on sale yet, and the attacks on our chapter about global warming are already underway.” Thats because parts of the text were available on amazon. At least until you or your company had it removed. Unfortunetly for you weak attempt at damage control most of the important incompetences in research and questionable ethical journalistic behavior have been extracted, so unless you are now releasing a newly edited version in a couple days, only the gullible are going to fall for this nonesense.
Then why is your co-author posting on this blog BBC articles claiming that global warming is no longer happening?
Oxpo,
I read a lot of science fiction when I was a boy, and now I know how preposterous it all was. I mean, there were stories about tourists in space, hand-held wireless communication devices that could fit in your ear, and China emerging as a power and sending people into space. There was even a story about a computer that held all the knowledge of the world and people could just dial in and learn about history, pop culture or science for free.
Obviously, Asimov et al were rather silly.
This is not a rebuttal. We need a point-by-point rebuttal. Your sources are saying you quoted them out of context. Your critics are showing clear instances where you guys got your facts wrong. You need to give us evidence that, for example, solar panels are black and not also blue, that mainstream thought was that the world was cooling in the 1970s when people are saying that was not what mainstream thought was then.
You should get to “work” a bit quicker on these issues.
You write: “ Meaningfully reducing global carbon emissions has proven to be difficult, if not impossible. This isn’t likely to change, for the reasons we discuss in the book. Consequently, other approaches represent a more promising path to lowering the Earth’s temperature. ” Actually, even though meaningful reduction is difficult, it might still be the most promising approach.
“The bottom line is that the foundation of these attacks is essentially fraudulent . . . ”
Much like a lot of the data used to support catastrophic anthropogenic global warming/climate change.
Science can prove that global warming is a farce driven by the far left politics and those that want no progress by mankind. When is America going to wake up and throw out the bums. Fred
You guys should also check out what Ezra Klein had to say about your drunk driving section over at his Washington Post Blog.
I can’t wait to read your replies to these criticisms. I’m a big fan of the first book but this stuff seems pretty damning.