Tuesday, October 30, 2012

Meteorologists Are Awesome!

A paean to meteorologists in the New York Times:
Expert meteorologists are forced to arbitrage a torrent of information to make their predictions as accurate as possible. After receiving weather forecasts generated by supercomputers, they interpret and parse them by, among other things, comparing them with various conflicting models or what their colleagues are seeing in the field or what they already know about certain weather patterns — or, often, all of the above.

...In 1972, the service’s high-temperature forecast missed by an average of six degrees when made three days in advance. Now it’s down to three degrees. More stunning, in 1940, the chance of an American being killed by lightning was about 1 in 400,000. Today it’s 1 in 11 million. This is partly because of changes in living patterns (more of our work is done indoors), but it’s also because better weather forecasts have helped us prepare.

Perhaps the most impressive gains have been in hurricane forecasting. Just 25 years ago, when the National Hurricane Center tried to predict where a hurricane would hit three days in advance of landfall, it missed by an average of 350 miles. If Hurricane Isaac, which made its unpredictable path through the Gulf of Mexico last month, had occurred in the late 1980s, the center might have projected landfall anywhere from Houston to Tallahassee, canceling untold thousands of business deals, flights and picnics in between — and damaging its reputation when the hurricane zeroed in hundreds of miles away. Now the average miss is only about 100 miles.

Why are weather forecasters succeeding when other predictors fail? It’s because long ago they came to accept the imperfections in their knowledge. That helped them understand that even the most sophisticated computers, combing through seemingly limitless data, are painfully ill equipped to predict something as dynamic as weather all by themselves. So as fields like economics began relying more on Big Data, meteorologists recognized that data on its own isn’t enough.
And here is another paean to meteorologists.

Here is a portion of a lecture from Ferenc Szasz, my favorite professor when I was in college (he passed away recently). His history of the Manhattan Project is the only one I know where there is good discussion of the meteorologists and their work. In the lecture, he briefly discusses Jack Hubbard and the meteorologists from 7:00 on (brief technical glitch just before the discussion). The meteorologists had to argue about the nature and vagaries of tropical air masses in New Mexico, and why the entire weight of wartime U.S. federal government would just have to wait for the storms to die down.

No comments:

Post a Comment