by Mad Dog

   Think about it, if doctors, airline pilots, and dry cleaners had the same success rate as TV weatherpeople there would be a major uprising. Well, except maybe from morticians, Amtrak, and clothing manufacturers. But for some reason weather forecasters are exempt from the normal guidelines of job performance. Maybe, as in kindergarten, “plays well with others,” “shares,” and “goes potty by himself” really are the most important personal attributes.

   I understand that weather forecasting — formally known as meteorology, from the Greek for “meatier paycheck” — isn’t an exact science, but it’s not right that my horoscope is more accurate than the 3-day forecast. We can put a man on the moon, create computers that do thousands of calculations per second while costing less than a big screen TV, and put cherries inside chocolate without the juice leaking out, yet we can’t say with better than a 25% probability whether it will rain six hours from now. This just isn’t right.

   Luckily in some countries they’re doing something about it. Last month the head of the Romanian National Meteorology Agency was fired for predicting warm weather on days when — whoops! — the temperature dropped to a record minus 36C and the Black Sea froze. In Russia, the mayor of Moscow says he’ll fine weather forecasters who blow it. This came after the city had its heaviest snowfall since record-keeping began in the 19th century but — whoops again! — the weather forecasters hadn’t been able to predict when it would hit or how much snow they’d get.

   In amongst all this they manage to show off some of the latest technology, including satellite photos, Doppler radar, computer imaging, and those weather maps that zoom around like bad video games, making you glad you copped those airsickness bags from the plane even though you thought they were doggie bags for your mini-pretzels. Yet for all their weather charts, reporting stations — that’s right, get those elementary school kids to do your work for you! — barometers, hygrometers, anemometers, and divination of chicken entrails, they still use professional help, though maybe not the kind we think they should be getting. Every TV station subscribes to several weather forecasting services, like the National Weather Service, AccuWeather, and Madame Gloria’s Psychic Hotline and Spanish Delicatessen. The weatherperson’s job, actually, is to cull through these and, using some of that college education, choose which forecast they think will be right. So it turns out that not only is their forecast usually wrong, so is their choice of which forecasting service to believe. Remind me not to listen to their stock tips.

   Choosing the forecast isn’t the only part of their job that’s difficult. Night after night they have to try to find something new and fresh to say. Face it, there are a limited number of weather conditions — sun, clouds, rain, snow, sleet, hail, and wind — and between a 0 and 100% chance of each happening. Since we’ve long heard all the possible permutations, they’re stuck trying their damnedest to get excited about things like a heat wave in August and a cold snap in January. Excuse me, but isn’t that what happens in August and January?

   Meteorology is a science, and as with all sciences, it’s can be very technical. So another part of the weatherperson’s job is to translate that jargon into language we all understand. Face it, we don’t care about isobars and inverted fronts, we want to know if we need to carry an umbrella and wear a jacket. But somewhere along the line weatherpeople were told that their viewers have the IQ of a remote control with a dead battery, which is why they make up new weather words (thunderboomers), create their own catchphrases (Frank’s Frigid Front Flows Freely), and generally act like Willard Scott, which wouldn’t be so bad except they act like him during his pre-weatherman days as Bozo the Clown.

   They should take a tip from the British, where the daily weather predictions in the newspaper include such true-life phrases as “bright start, then outbreaks of rain” and “freshening southeast winds.” Don’t these sound infinitely more refined? Though to be honest, the writer could have been wearing a red rubber nose while typing them for all I know.

   Maybe we should quit griping about weatherpeople — or at least I should — and just learn from them. “There’s a 50% chance of getting that hamburger the way you want it,” would really take the pressure off fast food workers. And personally, being able to say “Doppler radar indicates this article will be partly funny with a chance of light drivel followed by periods of clearing and gusts of hot blustery air” would really get me off the hook. Now if I can only find a way to make the silly ties and hair spray tax deductible.

©2005 Mad Dog Productions, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
These columns appear in better newspapers across the country. Hold them over your head so you don't get wet on those sunny days the weatherperson told you about.