A newly published investigation asserts that an excessive reliance on remote sensing technologies and computational models can cause scientists to overlook crucial aspects of meteorological events, thereby influencing the quality of Earth system models and the overall grasp of scientific knowledge. The researchers advocate for immediate, field-based inspections to enhance data reliability, stimulate inventive thinking, and deepen the scope of environmental learning.
To excel in a particular scientific discipline, it may be essential to physically spend time in the relevant research environment.
A cross-disciplinary group of researchers led by John T. Van Stan of Cleveland State University makes the case for the necessity of leaving the confines of the laboratory to engage in direct observation of weather-related phenomena such as precipitation, snowfall, and hidden moisture deposition. In an article featured in the BioScience journal, they argue that first-hand data collection of weather events is vital for understanding the intricacies of hydrological conditions and their varying effects on ecosystems.
In recent observations, Van Stan and his team noted a growing inclination within the scientific community to depend on remote sensing technologies for studying climatic events and their repercussions. They stated, “There is an increasing tendency among natural scientists to rely on distant sensors, mathematical models, and computer-simulated experiments to gain insights into natural processes. As a result, significant meteorological phenomena, inventive insights, and the chance to develop intuitive understanding—which are all central to scientific advancement—are frequently overlooked.”
This approach, which they refer to as “remote observation science,” poses the risk of neglecting localized occurrences. For example, they describe that when assessing how rainfall moves from forest canopies to the underlying soil, “if specific branches effectively channel and direct rainwater towards the trunk, the amount of water reaching the adjacent soil could be magnified more than a hundredfold.”
Moreover, the team highlights that phenomena like ground-level fog, moisture confined beneath forest covers, and evaporated water columns can elude remote observation but would be perceptible to field-based scientists. On a larger scale, such lapses can introduce inaccuracies into Earth systems models, commonly resulting in underestimations of water storage in canopies. They assert that such errors may contribute to “a substantial potential skew in the surface temperature projections made by Earth system models.”
In addition to mitigating these flaws in “remote observation science,” Van Stan and his collaborators recognize the inherent benefits of direct observational methods. These methods are valuable not only for established scientists but also for students focused on understanding the climatic impact on ecosystems. They contend that this engaged approach enhances comprehension, ignites intellectual curiosity, and establishes a more intimate connection with the natural world, consequently fostering an enriched environmental education, motivating scholarly inquiry, and equipping the upcoming generation of scientists.
Reference: “Considerations on Weather Exposure: The Imperative for Scientists to Spend More Time in Natural Conditions” by John T Van Stan, et al., 7 June 2023, BioScience. DOI: 10.1093/biosci/biad044
Financial backing for the study was provided by institutions including the National Science Foundation, the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries, the McIntire Stennis Project, the DOE/U.S. Department of Energy, and the U.S. Forest Service.
