Superfreakonomics

    There aren't many authors capable of writing about teachers and sumo wrestlers cheating before switching to the connection between abortion and crime. Especially doing so in an interesting and engaging manner. That's why, many years ago when I read Freakonomics by Steven Levitt and Stephen Dubner I'd been so impressed.

    Somehow, I missed that they actually had a followup: Superfreakonomics. So of course, upon finding out about it, I felt the need to read it. There's a lot going for it. Written in the same approachable, yet informative, style, it asks seemingly random questions about the relationship of two vastly dissimilar topics prior to teasing out their connection. It relies on data and statististics, referencing experts.

    Some incredible trends emerge - for instance, apparently having a pimp leads to higher wages and safer conditions for Chicago prostitutes, while the home price increase that realtors bring does not offset their cut (although other less tangible benefits such as time needs to be factored in). The most shocking one was that there are more deaths due to intoxicated walking than drunk driving when normalized by the number of miles traveled. 

    And had the authors stuck with this winning format, I would have been as happy with the sequel as I'd been with the original. Unfortunately, they decided to tackle bigger questions and reached for climate change... That's when the approach of breaking down complex questions into small logical steps breaks down. Climate change is a huge issue. And one that isn't amenable to being drastically simplified away. I won't pretend like I'm better qualified than their sources - I wish I had the opportunity to speak to Nobel prize winning scientists. However, the vast oversimplifications that they propose seem almost dismissive, and unfortunately, when the entire last third of the book doesn't sit well with me, the whole work leaves a sour taste when it's finished. A shame really...