Personally - I'm waiting for the research on the research on the psychology of expertise in whether forecasting.

did you mean the research on the study of research on the psychology of expertise in weather forecasting?

> Human expertise will always be necessary.

I reckon this will prove to be untrue.

All I know about this subject is that human is already obsolete. Even stuff like CNN performs better than equations few years back then.

> Early weather forecasts were made by meteorologists, who laboriously constructed contour maps of temperature and other variables by hand, using experience and tradecraft to fill in between sparse observations

> However, the skill of computer forecasts has improved steadily over time, and modeling is now the primary approach for making operational weather forecasts.

from Nation Academy of Science (USA) https://doi.org/10.17226/23650.

Beyond today's forecast at best, it's all bullshit and guesses, to be honest.

I was watching the weather for the last few days for any chance of rain to determine how much I might need to water my garden. There was no rain forecast yesterday. Then overnight we had a downpour out of nowhere, a couple of inches total.

This is how it's always been. It's a game of guessing the future based on observations of the present. Like picking stocks, it doesn't work very well.

The forecast usually only covers waking hours. Morning and late afternoon

There's always a human at the end of the value chain.

But often that human provides no expertise whatsoever.

Which, ironically and tragically, makes the characteristics of the particular human the most impactful variation in the information chain.

A bit like how the quality of a science journalist has more impact on the quality of reported science than the quality of the science.

Real or other

The topic is interesting and the paper looks well sourced, but I find the title to be quite the mouthful!

"Thinking about the thoughts of thinkers about the thinking of expert thinkers of weather thoughts."

I second.

Tldr - No actual content, just a link to a book that costs $55. Am I missing something?