The Safir-Simpson hurricane scale is a classification method to identify the intensity of a tropical cyclone by civil engineer Herbert Saffir and meteorologist Bob (Robert) Simpson, but this method proved to be useless due to its failures to identify the two thirds of the top 156 deadliest hurricanes from 1851 to 1996. I found the overgeneralization problem caused this.
I developed a new classification method to deal with this problem, but many reviewers and editors told me that even though what you said is correct, we still insist on using SSHS, and your paper can't be published at least in the journals of USA due to common people accepting SSHS. I really don't know why this thing could happen in scientific world, any people know the true reason?
Dear Kenneth M Towe,
Thank you very much for your response. The classification of typhoons was proposed by Coching Chu who was the former president of our university.
I am very familar with the method. I develop a method for north Atlantic based on this method, but many reviewers and editors had strong prejudice on the method published in Monthy Weather Review(1924), which was inconvienient in north Atlantic.
Stronger TCs usually have stronger winds but do not always have stronger damage to human and vice versa. Your method might be suitable for the impact of weather on human society, but not suitable for pure meteorology itself. You may find some suitable journal for your paper such as Natural Hazards.
In science, if we want to investigate any scientific problem, major influence factors should be given more priority to be investigated. However, only one field is an exception: that is global climate warming. Many scientists ignore the major climate influence factors and consider greenhouse effect due to human reasons to be the main reason , although they knew it is much smaller than the major climate factors.
Their logic is that the recent unusual trend of land surface temperature is non-periodic, major periodic factors only cause periodic changes.
Recently, after more than a half year's effort, we prove that the monthly anomaly of global land surface temperature can be fitted perfectly by a group of periodic functions, the verification results indicate that the correlated coefficients of more than 15,000 periodic functions are all more than 0.9.(Last year, I mentioned I found a function which its the correlated coefficient is 0.8)
I send the paper to one of the toppest IF magazines, the editor said" we know your reseach result is absolutely right,but many people already believe in this view, thousands of papers have already published , so we have to reject your paper. And we also tell you that no magazine is willing to publish your paper".
One anonymous email is send to me with the following word :
"Birth is much, but breeding is more."
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Linguistics
- Composition Studies
- Publication