Matt Ridley — full-on libertarian?

I lived Ridley's book, "Nature via Nurture," several years ago. I loved it not only because it was good science writing, but because I thought it signaled the end of his Pop Ev Psych politics and thoughts.

Well, perhaps not so fast.

A month or so ago, in a Wall Street Journal op-ed, he appeared to dip at least one toe in the waters of climate climate denialism.

Now, he's arguing for free market solutions to obesity problems. And, again, in a WSJ op-ed.

So, maybe "Nature via Nurture" was just a phase. Whatever "conversion" was involved didn't fully stick.

If not a "full-on libertarian," at the least, his "rational optimism" puts him in the same camp, albeit focusing on different issues, as Clay Shirky et al.

Hell, next, he'll be asked to be on Skepticblog With Michael Shermer and Brian Dunning as another libertarian pseudoskeptic.

Meanwhile, his "rational optimism" is probably not rational. In the case of his partial degree, or whatever, of climate change denialism, it's certainly not "empirical optimism." And, on the issue of obesity, he's trying to "inflict" rationality on something not amenable to rational amelioration, at least to that part of obesity due to food addiction/compulsion.

And, his claim that we're all going to be super-rich in the not too distant future? That's likely as the stock market hitting 20,000 by 2010.

Actually, Ridley is more the full-on British version of an American financial sector clusterfucker.

While the ideas in "Nature via Nurture" are still good, he's got zero credibility as a science journalist now.

For a much longer review of "The Rational Optimist," go here.