Levitt

Category archives for Levitt

Thingsbreak has been documenting the way Levitt and Dubner keeping digging the hole deeper, and Dubner has kept on digging with this whopper: we believe that anyone who reads our chapter without an agenda wouldn’t even find it particularly controversial. They will see that we routinely address the concerns that critics accuse us of ignoring…

Levitt and Dubner still haven’t engaged with their critics’ arguments and continue to respond with nothing more than name calling. Their latest piece in USA Today likens climate scientists to flat earthers: Devoted environmentalists, meanwhile, as well as some members of the tight-knit climate-science community, find this sort of idea repugnant. Using sulfur dioxide to…

Steve Levitt has followed in Dubner’s footsteps with a response to his critics that fails to respond to their arguments. Levitt first restates his argument and then asserts that their conclusions are different because: We are answering a different question than our critics. Our question, at noted above, is what is the cheapest, fastest way…

Well, they are shown next to each other in Dave Weigel’s story Climate Change Skeptics Embrace ‘Freakonomics’ Sequel, but that’s not the answer I’m thinking of. Weigel writes: The final chapter deals with global warming, characterizing the beliefs of pessimistic environmentalists as “religious fervor,” and arguing that the climate change solutions proposed by Al Gore…

I reviewed Freakonomics when it first came out and really liked it. So I was looking forward to the sequel Superfreakonomics. Unfortunately, Levitt and Dubner decided to write about global warming and have made a dreadful hash of it. The result is so wrong that it has even Joe Romm and William Connolley in agreement.…

After Lott’s lawsuit against Freakonomics was thrown out of court, he tried for a doever by amending his complaint. The judge said no, so Lott appealed. And now he’s lost the appeal as well. More discussion at Volokh.

William Ford reports on the oral arguments in Lott’s appeal of the dismissal of his lawsuit against Levitt: Evans and Sykes asked all the questions. Ripple remained silent. I have only glanced at the briefs, but based on the questions and comments during the oral argument, Lott’s chances do not look very good. … An…

Ted Frank has the latest on Lott’s appeal of the dismissal of his case: Lott is now claiming that the case should have been decided under the allegedly more friendly Virginia libel law than the Illinois law under which his claim fails, but that is generally an argument for (at best) a claim of legal…

Back in August I wrote how Lott tried to amend his complaint against Levitt. Unfortunately for Lott, the judge rejected his proposed amendments as “futile and unduly delayed”. So now Lott is appealing the decision. William Ford has the update.

When we last visited Lott’s lawsuit against Levitt, Lott was asking the judge to reconsider the dismissal of his case against Freakonomics. Well, the judge denied this, so now Lott wants to amend his complaint. The new complaint adds is now about another sentence in Freakonomics as well: Then there was the troubling allegation that…