SuperFreakonomics

Finally, the long-awaited sequel to Freakonomics has come out. I have read it and enjoyed it. The book, just like its predecessor, takes an anti-mainstream approach to exploring and analyzing, well, everything. It suggests that drunk driving is less hazardous than "drunk walking;" it claims that child safety car seats are no better at saving lives than regular seat belts. It purports that nonviolent television is just as responsible for increased crime rates as violent television. And it backs up all of these seemingly outlandish assertions with the most ironclad proof of all: statistics, facts, and trends. Rather than blindly jumping to conclusions or assumptions based on mitigating evidence, Levitt and Dubner look at exhaustive datasets before alleging that, for example, automobiles are far more environmentally friendly and fatal-accident-proof than horses. My favorite chapter of all, the final one, deals with global warming. Now, I have a stance on global warming that many - myself included - would consider ignorant: not so much "it isn't happening" as much as "what's the big deal?" Yeah, I've heard all the doomsday proclaimers. I get that runaway warming by tens of degrees Fahrenheit would kill hundreds of millions. But this planet has endured frequent and drastic climate change for life's entire history. (Consider the glacial formations and retreats that have shaped the very continents we now inhabit.) I realize that this "so what?" mentality seems rather cold-hearted, but I'm just not buying global warming as even a top ten threat to humankind. It is, as it has so charmingly been dubbed by its most visible opponent, an "inconvenient truth." But so are stubbed toes and tooth aches. Whatever. The point here isn't that I don't think global warming is a big deal; it's that Levitt and Dubner take everything you've ever heard about it and throw it out the window, coming up with their own explanations for its emergence and their own solutions for its inherent dangers. I loved it. While Al Gore has asked everyone to take drastic steps to reduce their own carbon footprints (while not doing so himself - but that's another story, and his hypocrisy is irrelevant for the sake of this discussion), Levitt and Dubner, reasoning in pure and simple economic terms, realize that the incentive just isn't there; people aren't willing to make great sacrifices for small scale, delayed, and shared rewards. Instead, they propose a few cheap and easy (relatively) solutions that are far more feasible than Gore's, even if they're not nearly as "feel-good" as the wishful scenario in which each and every person, corporation, and government "goes green." I won't spoil the book by giving these solutions away, but I'll say that one of them involves pumping coal plant pollution into the stratosphere. Yes, these two guys dare to proclaim that we can solve the global warming crisis by using the very same poisonous gasses that - according to popular opinion - created it. Again, the book is a thrill to read from start to finish, and your perception of various "facts" of life is bound to change upon your completion of it. It ends with a short epilogue detailing a hilarious episode in which several monkeys were trained to use currency. I fully recommend SuperFreakonomics, as well as its predecessor, to all who fancy themselves "creative thinkers" of any kind. Two great books from two great minds.