Comments on Planned and Inadvertent Weather Modification, a policy statement of the American Meteorological Society

Comments on Planned and Inadvertent Weather Modification, a policy statement of the American... letter to the editor Comments on "Planned and Inadvertent Weather original decisions to employ statistical analysis were Modification," a policy statement of the American wrong. The more recent randomized cloud seeding Meteorological Society programs conducted in Israel and Tasmania em- ployed statistical methods of analysis to good effect in The policy statement on "Planned and Inadvertent demonstrating substantial increases in precipitation Weather Modification" (Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 73, by cloud seeding. 331) should be revised to prevent misconceptions The authors of the AMS policy statement should concerning the early history of scientific weather modi- consider that current techniques and instrumentation fication. As written, it wrongly criticizes the scientific for weather modification studies, such as modeling, foundations of field operations conducted 40 or more microwave radiometry, multiparameter radars, and years ago in the light of today's knowledge. chemical tracers, while certainly different or more The operational (as opposed to research or experi- sophisticated than those techniques and instrumenta- mental) cloud seeding programs, such as those con- tion employed 40 years ago, may also not lead to ducted in the Sierra Nevada Mountains beginning in definitive conclusions about the precipitation enhance- the late 1940s and early 1950s by California electric ment potential of cloud seeding field operations. Dif- power companies and water conservation and stor- ferent and more sophisticated do not necessarily age districts, must be considered to have been soundly mean better. The authors run the risk of having their based scientifically. These programs were carefully own weather modification research or operational planned with the aid of many of those scientists who program results characterized as "without sound sci- were conducting the research programs in weather entific foundation" in 50 years (or less) if science modification. progresses in a different direction than the one cur- The scientific credentials of the pioneers in weather rently envisioned as the correct way to conduct and modification, such as Irving Langmuir, Vincent evaluate weather modification field programs, or if Schaefer, Bernard Vonnegut, Roscoe Braham, Patrick they fail to arrive at the correct solution to the problem Squires, and E. J. Smith, should not be in question. of quantifying precipitation increases from cloud seed- Their field programs were conducted using the best of ing operations. sound scientific knowledge available when those pro- The AMS policy statement on planned and inad- grams were conducted. vertent weather modification appears to reflect the Similarly, the decisions to employ statistical analy- opinions of only a few members of the Society. Per- ses of the precipitation data from early randomized haps drafts of each policy statement should be circu- field operations were surely scientifically sound. To lated to all members who are interested in that area, so say otherwise is to impugn the scientific reputations of that differences of opinion that exist among members all those who proposed the use of statistical analysis might be properly framed and deficiencies might be and those who accepted their proposals. Finding out corrected before adoption. at some later date that this approach did not always produce the anticipated results does not imply that the WILLIAM G . FINNEGAN AND RICHARD L. PITTER DESERT RESEARCH INSTITUTE ©199 3 American Meteorological Society RENO, NEVADA Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society American Meteorological Society

Comments on Planned and Inadvertent Weather Modification, a policy statement of the American Meteorological Society

Free
1 page

Loading next page...
1 Page
 
/lp/ams/comments-on-planned-and-inadvertent-weather-modification-a-policy-usEilZCz10
Publisher
American Meteorological Society
Copyright
Copyright © American Meteorological Society
ISSN
1520-0477
D.O.I.
10.1175/1520-0477-74.9.1745
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

letter to the editor Comments on "Planned and Inadvertent Weather original decisions to employ statistical analysis were Modification," a policy statement of the American wrong. The more recent randomized cloud seeding Meteorological Society programs conducted in Israel and Tasmania em- ployed statistical methods of analysis to good effect in The policy statement on "Planned and Inadvertent demonstrating substantial increases in precipitation Weather Modification" (Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 73, by cloud seeding. 331) should be revised to prevent misconceptions The authors of the AMS policy statement should concerning the early history of scientific weather modi- consider that current techniques and instrumentation fication. As written, it wrongly criticizes the scientific for weather modification studies, such as modeling, foundations of field operations conducted 40 or more microwave radiometry, multiparameter radars, and years ago in the light of today's knowledge. chemical tracers, while certainly different or more The operational (as opposed to research or experi- sophisticated than those techniques and instrumenta- mental) cloud seeding programs, such as those con- tion employed 40 years ago, may also not lead to ducted in the Sierra Nevada Mountains beginning in definitive conclusions about the precipitation enhance- the late 1940s and early 1950s by California electric ment potential of cloud seeding field operations. Dif- power companies and water conservation and stor- ferent and more sophisticated do not necessarily age districts, must be considered to have been soundly mean better. The authors run the risk of having their based scientifically. These programs were carefully own weather modification research or operational planned with the aid of many of those scientists who program results characterized as "without sound sci- were conducting the research programs in weather entific foundation" in 50 years (or less) if science modification. progresses in a different direction than the one cur- The scientific credentials of the pioneers in weather rently envisioned as the correct way to conduct and modification, such as Irving Langmuir, Vincent evaluate weather modification field programs, or if Schaefer, Bernard Vonnegut, Roscoe Braham, Patrick they fail to arrive at the correct solution to the problem Squires, and E. J. Smith, should not be in question. of quantifying precipitation increases from cloud seed- Their field programs were conducted using the best of ing operations. sound scientific knowledge available when those pro- The AMS policy statement on planned and inad- grams were conducted. vertent weather modification appears to reflect the Similarly, the decisions to employ statistical analy- opinions of only a few members of the Society. Per- ses of the precipitation data from early randomized haps drafts of each policy statement should be circu- field operations were surely scientifically sound. To lated to all members who are interested in that area, so say otherwise is to impugn the scientific reputations of that differences of opinion that exist among members all those who proposed the use of statistical analysis might be properly framed and deficiencies might be and those who accepted their proposals. Finding out corrected before adoption. at some later date that this approach did not always produce the anticipated results does not imply that the WILLIAM G . FINNEGAN AND RICHARD L. PITTER DESERT RESEARCH INSTITUTE ©199 3 American Meteorological Society RENO, NEVADA Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society

Journal

Bulletin of the American Meteorological SocietyAmerican Meteorological Society

Published: Sep 1, 1993

There are no references for this article.

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 12 million articles from more than
10,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Unlimited reading

Read as many articles as you need. Full articles with original layout, charts and figures. Read online, from anywhere.

Stay up to date

Keep up with your field with Personalized Recommendations and Follow Journals to get automatic updates.

Organize your research

It’s easy to organize your research with our built-in tools.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

Monthly Plan

  • Read unlimited articles
  • Personalized recommendations
  • No expiration
  • Print 20 pages per month
  • 20% off on PDF purchases
  • Organize your research
  • Get updates on your journals and topic searches

$49/month

Start Free Trial

14-day Free Trial

Best Deal — 39% off

Annual Plan

  • All the features of the Professional Plan, but for 39% off!
  • Billed annually
  • No expiration
  • For the normal price of 10 articles elsewhere, you get one full year of unlimited access to articles.

$588

$360/year

billed annually
Start Free Trial

14-day Free Trial