100% agree. Scientists and engineers all know that you must provide validation results, accuracy/uncertainty calculations, etc. or your data is just a pretty guess. I think weather forecast models are so commoditized and useful for laypersons that we've UX'd all of the complexity (scrutinizing the data) out of the product. The most scrutiny I ever see are people discussing what "Probability of Precipitation" values really mean.
My grad thesis advisor encouraged me to actually get the Environment Canada models and learn how to run them (they're in FORTRAN). I could never make them spit out data consistent with what EC publishes. That's probably on me, but it was a real eye-opener to this whole domain's complexity.
My grad thesis advisor encouraged me to actually get the Environment Canada models and learn how to run them (they're in FORTRAN). I could never make them spit out data consistent with what EC publishes. That's probably on me, but it was a real eye-opener to this whole domain's complexity.