Pointing the finger at scientists is a dangerous trend that the right and far-right have embraced since the coronavirus pandemic. Doing so after a tragedy like the one produced by DANA in Valencia, and in a context of climate crisis, is a serious irresponsibility that puts us all in danger, according to meteorology experts.
“No one can make decisions based on information that may be accurate, that may be inaccurate, that may be improvable,” said the president of the PP, Alberto Núñez Feijóo, on Thursday, trying to excuse the Valencian president, Carlos Mazón . , and after having explicitly indicated “the bodies with exclusive competence of the central government”, in reference to the State Meteorological Agency (AEMET). In the same spirit, the mayor of Madrid, José Luis Martínez Almeida, asked the meteorological agency to “refine” its forecasts after the DANA alert in the center of the peninsula in 2023.
“They make the population suspicious”
“The performance of AEMET in DANA has been impeccable,” says Francisco J. Tapiador, professor of Earth physics at the University of Castilla-La Mancha (UCLM). “Questioning the work of its professionals only leads the population to distrust future alerts and the work of meteorologists. This, as we have seen, ends in personal misfortunes.
“Criticizing AEMET and meteorologists after a major tragedy is not only grossly clumsy, it indicates a worrying lack of knowledge when the criticism comes from people whose task is to manage risky meteorological situations,” adds José Miguel Viñas, Meteored meteorologist.
Criticizing AEMET and meteorologists after a major tragedy is not only extremely clumsy, it indicates a worrying lack of knowledge.
Jose Miguel Vinas
— Weather meteorologist.
“Politicians, whatever their religion, have an interest in deflecting their ultimate responsibilities, and we will always have this problem until the entire warning system is overhauled from top to bottom,” says Francisco Martín León , meteorologist and coordinator of RAM (Meteorology). Amateur Magazine). “During my 36 years of experience, the chain of responsibilities is always broken by the weak link: the politician in office takes advantage of the flaws in the prediction, which will never be accurate, to evade his responsibilities.”
An attempt to signal to others
AEMET itself published a press release on Thursday in which it explained that its observation and monitoring systems make it possible to make predictions, “but it is the competent civil protection authorities who are responsible for them”. […] issue appropriate opinions and adopt the most appropriate protective measures.
The memo responds to a campaign of criticism against the agency in an attempt to conceal the true chronology of the opinions and the way in which political authorities decided to ignore this information. “In our opinions we must always take into account that there are uncertainties, but on this occasion we have already had special opinions since Sunday,” explains its spokesperson, Rubén del Campo, to elDiario.es. “Pointing the finger at weather services doesn’t help.”
On this occasion we already had specific opinions since Sunday. Pointing to weather services doesn’t help
Rubén del Campo
— AEMET spokesperson
“The activation of the red notice early Tuesday morning should have instantly triggered the civil protection red alert and at that moment, the notice should have sounded on citizens’ cell phones,” insists José Miguel Viñas. “If you do not act with this agility, the value of prediction is wasted (with its limitations, which must be assumed) and critical hours are lost to save lives. Zero risk does not exist, but we would avoid tragedies as dramatic as the one that occurred in Valencia.”
“What meteorologists do is translate these probabilities into warnings. “This is the best we can do with the available science,” says Tapiador. “What you need to do is take the AEMET red alerts seriously, which means staying at home, protecting your vehicles and going to higher altitudes if you are in a flood zone. “Everything else sows confusion among the population.” “The formation of the catastrophic DANA was well planned several days in advance and AEMET fulfilled its function by alerting at all times of the level of danger,” explains professor of physical geography at the University of Barcelona (UB), Javier Martin See. . “Let’s trust our meteorologists.”
Play with numbers
One of the most repeated criticisms is that AEMET predicted that DANA would leave 180 liters per square meter and that in some areas 600 liters ended up falling, an error intended to sow confusion, according to experts. “I have been dedicated to studying precipitation with satellites and forecast models for 25 years and I am a physics professor,” explains Tapiador. “It is impossible to predict with precision whether the day after tomorrow at noon there will be 200 or 500 liters, or whether the maximum will be in Valencia or Alicante.”
“Our forecasts can of course be improved, because there will always be uncertainty in a chaotic system,” admits Rubén del Campo. “Specifically, DANAS are difficult because a small variation dramatically changes the area where it will rain, and the exact amounts are unpredictable today.”
“No one can predict this, neither here nor elsewhere,” insists Tapiador. “But this is not necessary: a red alert from AEMET means it is very likely that there will be catastrophic rain over a wide area over the next few hours. That’s all that can be said, and that’s what was said. AEMET’s alert was based on the best available scientific data. To ask anything else is to have no idea about meteorology or physics.
AEMET’s alert was based on the best available scientific data. To ask anything else is to have no idea about meteorology or physics.
Francisco J. Tapiador
— Professor of Earth Physics at the University of Castile-La Mancha (UCLM)
“The models have limits to accurately quantify how much it will rain and in which specific areas, although since Monday it has already been reported that the zero point would be in the province of Valencia,” observes José Miguel Viñas. “At that time, prevention protocols should have been activated, limiting road travel and school and professional activities in non-essential jobs.
Who assumes unpopularity
“They are trying to draw attention to this rain threshold and not to the real problem, which is that the warning was not interpreted correctly,” explains Martín León. The key, he says, is that the way the emergency system is set up leaves the final decision – whether to interrupt people’s lives as a precaution and to avoid greater harm – in the hands of politicians who do not want to assume unpopularity. that sometimes predictions will not come true. “As long as we do not optimize this system and at the bottom of the scale there is a politician,” he assures, “this will continue to happen.”
For Rubén del Campo, we must all think to avoid this happening again in the future and internalize that a red notice represents a significant danger and that our lives will be affected. “In the context of a climate crisis, it is becoming clear that the strongest storms are stronger, so we must be aware that the situation can be even more extreme than expected,” he emphasizes. “If a red notice is serious, let’s think it may be more serious than we anticipate.
In other words, put yourself in this default mental mode and instill it, if necessary, in schools. “And above all”, underlines the AEMET spokesperson, “take on this problem with serenity and without throwing ourselves on our heads”.
