tallywx wrote:The Pros. would also realize that the important "last step" of the scientific method is peer review, skepticism, debate, discussion, which inspires progress. Science cannot advance if an expert's word is immediately taken as gospel.
I'm a scientist turned economist (which is a "social science"). To tear a page out of economic theory, allowing pros. to rest on their credentials creates disincentive for them. They are less pressured and thus less inclined to question themselves, their methodology, and their findings. A good skeptic (meaning skepticism well placed) is a Pareto improvement, meaning it benefits all sides. If the skeptic is incorrect, he/she has learned something new. If the Pro. is incorrect, he/she has attained new knowledge. The third party (e.g. public receiving the forecast) is better off because this new knowledge translates into better understanding meaning better predictions for them in the future.
So question away! Don't question for the sake of opposing a pro, but definitely question when the issue merits it.
thank you, i am a meteorology student and continuing to learn as i question, and will continue to do so