3e:I[185,["/_next/static/chunks/08z4tkzvltetr.js","/_next/static/chunks/121~yigv24_j6.js","/_next/static/chunks/0jo3du-icy6v2.js","/_next/static/chunks/15cy49d~_zsjj.js","/_next/static/chunks/0..ktetnpeix7.js","/_next/static/chunks/0_htf5~kl..m1.js","/_next/static/chunks/0i6hzvr84kc1r.js"],"SendEmailButton"] 44:I[45269,["/_next/static/chunks/08z4tkzvltetr.js","/_next/static/chunks/121~yigv24_j6.js","/_next/static/chunks/0jo3du-icy6v2.js","/_next/static/chunks/15cy49d~_zsjj.js","/_next/static/chunks/0..ktetnpeix7.js","/_next/static/chunks/0_htf5~kl..m1.js","/_next/static/chunks/0i6hzvr84kc1r.js"],"SignupCTA"] 3f:T501,

In today’s episode, I’m tackling the bold, research-backed claim that AI produces lower carbon emissions for writing and drawing than humans. We’ll break down the study’s methodology, question its framing, and uncover the glaring omissions that make its conclusions feel more like a pro-AI pitch than neutral science. Plus, you’ll learn what Mark Twain has to do with all of this and why apples-to-oranges carbon calculations can skew the bigger picture.

Join me as I unpack the study’s findings, explore why bias in research matters, and share tips for critically evaluating the next viral “science-backed” claim you encounter.

Referenced: