John Stossel
« Here Come the Bribes
Dumb and Dumber Choices »

  • October 21, 2009 12:33 PM EDT by John Stossel

    The Global Warming Church vs. SuperFreakonomics, Part II

    More news from the ongoing battle between the Global Warming Church and SuperFreakonomics (which, by the way, came out yesterday).  Nathan Myhrvold, who Joe Romm attempted to smear as a “FAKER,” has responded:

    Science works by having an open dialog that ultimately converges on the truth, for the common benefit of everyone. Most scientific fields enjoy this free flow of ideas.

    ...SuperFreakonomics dares to comment on climate issues in a manner that Romm sees as contrary to his agenda, so he sets out to smear the book and me as a figure in the book.

    Yes. As Levitt and Dubner realized, even if you agree on that the earth is warming and we should consider solutions to solve it, you face bitter personal attacks if you dare break from the orthodoxy of the alarmists.

    In SuperFreakonomics, Myhrvold suggests that solar energy could provide a “great carbon-free infrastructure,” but would cost huge amounts of energy to build enough plants necessary to replace coal and other fossil fuels. Romm takes this caveat out of context to suggest that Myhrvold is anti-solar-energy.   Myhrvold says that’s simply not true:

    I am not anti-solar or anti-renewable energy. I am a co-inventor on several solar energy inventions …[My company has] inventions in other forms of carbon-free energy production, energy conservation, and transmission. But Romm interprets my remarks as an “amateur takedown of solar” which he had to attack.

    In fact, he’s all about renewable energy.  He just believes we need to rationally debate the costs:

    I just think we need to understand the limitations accurately, particularly the short-term implications that most people neglect.

    People neglect the costs because they are blinded by orthodoxy.

    This kind of attack makes it very difficult for people to suggest new ideas … The politicization of science has a terrible impact on the unfettered discourse of ideas that is so important to making progress.

RSS Subscribe to Comments

anon

The proper acronym for Romm is L.I.A.R.

October 22, 2009 at 12:11 pm

M Sailor

Welcome to FOX, John! I will now get to see you and benefit from your insights and wisdom. I rarely watch any other so-called "news" channel. They re just too boring and uninformed. So glad you are with FOX.

October 21, 2009 at 8:58 pm

GenSpec

Something's wrong with the comments system. "Expanded discussion" doesn't open. Also, Myhrvold made some huge errors in that chapter. Said transportation is a small part of CO2. Yet it's 33%, only second to electricity generation (40%). Myhrvold looks bad because the Superfreaks author's didn't know what they were writing about. Very sloppy.

October 21, 2009 at 8:28 pm

fast eddie

As a day trader, we use "chart matching" to see which historical patterns a current stock is most "channeled" with. It documents the past trends that are closest and best predicts future trends from historical data. The closest "climate change" temperature graph most closely matches Pacific Decadal Oscillation. Basically, the North Pacific water currents (much like El Nino to the south) that affects cloud cover, that then simultaneously block out heating rays and trap heat on the earth.

October 21, 2009 at 6:00 pm

fast eddie

Yep, there is some science out there. CO2 is not a major greenhouse gas. If you look at Qwest Field in Seattle and all 72,000 fans were wearing white, there would only be about 25 fans wearing red. That is CO2's "influence" in the atmosphere. The IPCC forgot to mention that over 90% of the molecules in the atmosphere are not "toxic greenhouse gases", but is water vapor. Yep, water. That doesn't help their wealth shifting agenda.

October 21, 2009 at 5:56 pm

Aaron Huertas

I think you're missing the bigger picture. In his post, Myhrvold says, "Geoengineering is proposed only as a last resort to try to reduce or cope with the even greater harms of global warming!" That DIRECTLY contradicts the main argument the book makes -- that geoengineering is preferable to reducing emissions. Myhrvold has joined Ken Caldeira -- their other main source -- in repudiating the main premise of the chapter. Case closed.

October 21, 2009 at 5:37 pm

daveyoung

John; Welcome to the world of FOX NEWS readers - where dogma is secondary to reality and truth is respected. I live in Nashville, and I promise that before Al Gore goes to bed one night, I am going to put a polar bear in his swimming pool. Best Wishes, Dave

October 21, 2009 at 4:25 pm

jonat

This orthidoxy is not limited to debating climate change. The narrow minded far left has hijacked the discussion on every issue, it seems. If you disagree with Obama, you are a racist. If you point out that the wealthiest pay nearly all the taxes, you are against the working poor and thereby, a racist by demographics. If you are for healthcare reform but against the public option you hate the poor and you are a racist. This chestnut is getting old. What happened to "liberal" on the left?

October 21, 2009 at 2:37 pm
(2 Replies)

About this Web Site

  • John Stossel joined FOX Business and FOX News in October 2009. His show, Stossel, airs on the Fox Business Network on Thursdays at 8 p.m. ET

    He is the New York Times best-selling author of Give Me A Break and Myths, Lies and Downright Stupidity. His "Give Me a Break" commentaries take a skeptical look at a wide array of issues, such as education, the economy, parenting, and more.

    Subscribe to the RSS feed for this blog.

browse posts