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.

Comments are closed.