July 14, 2014

Google Logo Add Us On GoogleAdd SciAm

Critics Slam Reports of a "Polar Vortex" in July

Years ago on Saturday Night Live, Gilda Radner played a little old lady, Emily Litella, who came onto the Weekend Update news set to deliver an editorial about a burning issue of the day—only she didn't quite have the correct terminology.

By Mark Fischetti

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

This article was published in Scientific American’s former blog network and reflects the views of the author, not necessarily those of Scientific American

Years ago on Saturday Night Live, Gilda Radner played a little old lady, Emily Litella, who came onto the Weekend Update news set to deliver an editorial about a burning issue of the day—only she didn’t quite have the correct terminology. She would begin to protest against “busting schoolchildren” when in fact the issue was busing schoolchildren, or about the “deaf penalty” instead of the death penalty. The fake news anchor would politely correct her, she would demure, look at the camera, and say “Never mind.”

So it is with the polar vortex. Since Friday, television news anchors and meteorologists on TV and online have been warning about a polar vortex that was crashing down from the Arctic across Canada and would bring record cold temperatures into the upper central U.S. today, tomorrow and Wednesday. Yes, the very same polar vortex that put the same region, as well as the Northeast, into a deep-freeze this past winter.

The one difference: the record lows would be 52 degrees F, or maybe 50 or 48.

On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.

In the name of science, other meteorologists went on Twitter and began to plead with their colleagues to not call this drifting southward of cool air a polar vortex, a few adding their cries to the hashtags #StopPolarVortexAbuse and #NotPolarVortex. Some of the admonishments present serious science. Others are just funny.

Seeing the pushback, and perhaps sensing that even the general, nonscientific public had a clue that a “polar vortex” in July was hype—or clickbait, if you prefer online news—many of the media personalities eased away from the term. Trying to make summer lemonade from his colleagues’ lemons, meteorologist Al Roker on the Today show said, “Okay, let’s not call this a polar vortex. Let’s call it a polar invasion.” Cue Emily Litella. Weather.com opted for “polar blast.” The National Weather Service—after several of its regional offices had made forecasts with the term, and had even displayed graphics of the evil vortex—went out of its way to note that the pool of chilly air everyone was fussing about was not a polar vortex.

So what is a polar vortex? How does it affect our weather? And does climate change make it more of a threat (in winter)? See our primer, here, complete with handy diagram. We posted it in January.

Graphic by XNR Productions

Rights & Permissions

Mark Fischetti was a senior editor at Scientific American for nearly 20 years and covered sustainability issues, including climate, environment, energy, and more. He assigned and edited feature articles and news by journalists and scientists and also wrote in those formats. He was founding managing editor of two spin-off magazines: Scientific American Mind and Scientific American Earth 3.0. His 2001 article “Drowning New Orleans” predicted the widespread disaster that a storm like Hurricane Katrina would impose on the city. Fischetti has written as a freelancer for the New York Times, Sports Illustrated, Smithsonian and many other outlets. He co-authored the book Weaving the Web with Tim Berners-Lee, inventor of the World Wide Web, which tells the real story of how the Web was created. He also co-authored The New Killer Diseases with microbiologist Elinor Levy. Fischetti has a physics degree and has twice served as Attaway Fellow in Civic Culture at Centenary College of Louisiana, which awarded him an honorary doctorate. In 2021 he received the American Geophysical Union’s Robert C. Cowen Award for Sustained Achievement in Science Journalism. He has appeared on NBC’s Meet the Press, CNN, the History Channel, NPR News and many radio stations.

More by Mark Fischetti

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe