Tuesday, March 30, 2010

The "Rodney Dangerfield of Sciences"

Yesterday evening, I posted on The New York Times' story about the global warming views of television meteorologists versus climatologists.  I read the 70+ comments and found them illuminating. For years I have joked that meteorology is the "Rodney Dangerfield of Sciences," we get no respect. Here is a small sample of those comments that illustrate what I mean...

Emily in Boston,
How often are meteorologists right? Maybe 10% of the time? There is hard evidence in support of climate change.

Nelson in NYC,
Most weather casters are not exactly intellectual giants.

Jason in Boston,
Is this a joke? TV "meterologists" versus actual scientists?  [Jason, you might want to learn to spell "meteorologist"]

Richard in Pasadena says,
Third weather forecasters can't get tomorrows temperature correct more than 50% of the time.
There was a time when the weather and astrology were on the same page in the newspaper. I'd say those editors had it right.


It goes on. This is why I wrote Warnings. Meteorologists have been more successful at saving lives (measured on a deaths per hundred thousand of population) than cardiology, cancer research or traffic safety. I'm hoping the dedication and good science practiced by meteorologists is finally recognized and appreciated.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.