Editing 1895: Worrying Scientist Interviews

When a new development occurs, news channels will often interview an expert in the field to educate laymen in what, exactly, is happening. Thus, when you turn on the local news and see a scientist being interviewed, it is likely that something new has come up regarding their field of study that could affect you. How much it affects you could range from an interesting bit of information about your local area, to the complete annihilation of the human race. So, to help identify how serious the issue likely is, [[Randall]] has made this chart showing how worried you should be depending on the field of the scientist. A [[#The fields of science|table]] has been arranged to explain the amount of worry needed for each field below.

To the far left, the least worrying are {{w|archaeologist}} and {{w|economist}}. An archaeologist studies ancient human civilizations, which would be unlikely to harm any modern person. Economists study and explain the trends of finances and resources, which are also unlikely to pose an immediate threat.{{Citation needed}}

Following this, it shows {{w|Nutrition|nutritionists}} and eventually {{w|criminologists}}. A nutritionist studies nutrition in the human body, and is likely discussing which food options are healthy or unhealthy. While this may be important, it is not a cause for immediate concern. A criminologist, however, studies criminal behavior. If a criminologist is being interviewed on the news, there is likely a change in criminal actions within the neighborhood, be it more or less. It is also possible there may be a serial criminal working in the area. However, because crime is a relatively rare occurrence, and one for which precautions can be taken, it is still unlikely to be an immediate threat to the viewer.

It then moves past researchers studying different types of organisms, before reaching astronomers. Still only very few events would be local regarding astronomy, but it could of course be regarding a pending meteor strike.

A {{w|virologist}} studies {{w|Virus|viral}} infections and their spread, and a {{w|vulcanologist}} studies {{w|volcanoes}}. Viruses spread quickly, and can be fatal, meaning a breaking news development in one's locale regarding viruses is likely to mean imminent danger. Volcanoes, depending on their size, can potentially demolish entire countries, thus having one making headlines nearby is also very concerning.

The last point to the right (most worried) "Astronomer who studies the Sun", also called a "{{w|solar physicist}}" (mentioned in the title text), could be really troublesome, but not especially locally. If there are serious problems with the Sun it will be a world-wide problem. But you should still be worried.  

 

==The fields of science==

| Archeologist || Extremely low (~2.7%) || Likely just dug up some old ruins or bones. Unlikely to involve bad news, though it may possibly cause problems (e.g. if a construction project is delayed to accommodate an archaeological investigation).

| Economist || Very low (~7.3%) || News about the economy could be either good or bad, and in most cases is just more of the usual ups and downs rather than anything cataclysmic. Could also be a report on a big stock market crash.

| Nutritionist || Very low (~12.0%) || Possible fad diet. Note that nutritionists tend not to be a protected profession, compared to dietitians. May be alarming if it involves credible information about bad health consequences of eating, or not eating, a particular food.

| Criminologist || Low (~26.6%) || Probably just crime statistics. Sometimes just correcting people who mistakenly believe crime is on the rise, and even a large increase in an otherwise ordinary crime rate is still a small risk overall. Specific threats (such as a dangerous criminal on the loose) are usually addressed by police representatives.

| Ornithologist || Medium (~43.3%) || This would indicate the discovery of a strange behavior exhibited by birds. A newsworthy event involving ornithologists could indicate some imminent problem with the ecological environment, such as a mass migration or death event suggesting toxic pollutants in the environment. A possible reference to ''{{w|The_Birds_(film)|The Birds}}'' or ''{{w|Birdemic}}'', two films with similar premises (horror films centered around flocks of birds suddenly becoming hostile to humans) but vastly different critical evaluations (''The Birds'' was directed by {{w|Alfred Hitchcock}} and is generally considered a classic; ''Birdemic'' was low-budget and is notoriously poor-quality).

| Botanist || Medium (~46.0%) || Similar to an ornithological related news. Seeing how plants are both more fundamental to the environment and more "boring" to the general public than birds; if something news worthy involves a botanist, then it is more likely a more fundamental and more impactful change to the environment.

| Marine Biologist || Medium (~53.3%) || Similar to Botanist news. However, as oceans represent the substantial majority of the Earth's surface, and are very far removed from local concerns, anything which is news-worthy of them is likely a major impact to the environment on a global scale.

| Entomologist || Medium high (~62.6%) || There might be a new invasive insect species that could cause health concerns, ranging from {{w|Locust|famine}} to {{w|Mosquito|blood-transmitted diseases}}.

| Astronomer || High (~82.0%) || Possible inbound meteor, or perhaps sighting of incoming alien ships.

| Virologist || Very high (~88.0%) || A disease that is incurable and spreads fast might ravage or even destroy a city, country, or (in an extreme case) all human life. An example of a worrisome virus is {{w|COVID-19}},{{Citation needed}} which resulted in many interviews with epidemiologists.  

| Vulcanologist || Very high (~93.3%) || A volcano might erupt soon, the danger of which could range from an isolated area to a planetwide concern.

| Astronomer who studies the Sun || Extremely high (~98.6%) || There might be something wrong with the Sun, the consequences of which could range from {{w|Solar_storm_of_1859|major disruption of modern technology}} to the end of life on earth. The title text elaborates that, [[1475: Technically|technically]], the correct term is "{{w|Solar physics|solar physicist}}". Unsurprisingly, reporters (and the general audience) aren't particularly interested in such a pedantic matter, and want to be informed about the more pressing issue regarding the fiery ball that maintains the Earth's orbit and capacity for life.{{Citation needed}}