I don't think he recanted his position, rather he's just decided to keep his beliefs more to himself. The latest I can find from him is in his 2016 book Presto!: "The truth is that Penn & Teller were never climate change deniers. We just didn't know. Since then, peer pressure and kowtowing to authority have shut us the fuck up. We drive electric cars. I can also try to placate the climate people by calling myself a vegan. Eating onions imported from Mexico leaves a smaller carbon footprint than eating local chickens." https://books.google.com/books?id=nVGmCwAAQBAJ&pg=PA240&lpg=...
Personally, I think I agree with Penn. I believe the world is warming, some significant portion of it is anthropogenic, but that many of the "received truths" of popular climate science are based on weak science and overstated evidence. Most of the conclusions will stand, but more will fall than the published error bars would indicate. I think it's a problem that one is not allowed to genuinely say "I don't know" when asked what one thinks about any scientific issue. Whether or not the current conclusions are true, it leads in a dangerous direction when people are shunned for stating their ignorance rather than proclaiming their faith in something they do not actually believe.
I don't think he recanted his position, rather he's just decided to keep his beliefs more to himself. The latest I can find from him is in his 2016 book Presto!: "The truth is that Penn & Teller were never climate change deniers. We just didn't know. Since then, peer pressure and kowtowing to authority have shut us the fuck up. We drive electric cars. I can also try to placate the climate people by calling myself a vegan. Eating onions imported from Mexico leaves a smaller carbon footprint than eating local chickens." https://books.google.com/books?id=nVGmCwAAQBAJ&pg=PA240&lpg=...
Personally, I think I agree with Penn. I believe the world is warming, some significant portion of it is anthropogenic, but that many of the "received truths" of popular climate science are based on weak science and overstated evidence. Most of the conclusions will stand, but more will fall than the published error bars would indicate. I think it's a problem that one is not allowed to genuinely say "I don't know" when asked what one thinks about any scientific issue. Whether or not the current conclusions are true, it leads in a dangerous direction when people are shunned for stating their ignorance rather than proclaiming their faith in something they do not actually believe.