Bomb Cyclone? Or just windy with a chance of hyperbole?

When the barometer drops, the volume of "buzzwords" increases, and many meteorologists are not happy.

DENVER - Last week, days after a bomb cyclone (associated with a series of atmospheric rivers, including some of the Pineapple Express variety) devastatingly targeted California, a downtown conference center was flooded by the responsible forces - not for the pouring rain and wind, but for the forecast.

Dozens of meteorologists and The world's top meteorologists have come together to share the latest research at the 103rd meeting of the American Meteorological Society. The subject line of an email sent to attendees on the first day hinted at optimism: "Daily Forecast: A Deluge of Scientific Knowledge".

But there there were troubling undercurrents. Scientists agree on the increasing frequency of extreme weather events - the blizzard in Buffalo, the floods in Montecito, California, the prolonged drought in East Africa - and their disturbing impacts. At the Denver meeting, however, there was another growing concern: how people are talking about the weather.

The widespread use of colorful terms like "bomb cyclone" and "atmospheric river," along with the proliferation of storm and weather categories, colors, and names, has struck meteorologists as a mixed blessing: good for public safety and climate change awareness, but potentially so amplified that it leaves the public numb or unsure of the real risk. The new vocabulary, devised in many cases by the meteorological community, threatens to spiral out of control.

"Language has evolved to get people's attention," said Cindy Bruyere, director of the Capacity Center for Climate and Weather Extremes at the National Center for Atmospheric Research.She sat down with two fellow scientists ifiques in a cafe between sessions and became increasingly animated as she discussed what she called "buzzwords" that didn't make sense.

"I have no image in my head when I hear the term 'bomb cyclone', she says. "We need much clearer language, not buzzwords."

Others find that the words, while evocative, are sometimes used incorrectly. "The worst thing is the 'polar vortex,'" said Andrea Lopez Lang, an atmospheric scientist at the State University of New York at Albany, as she stood in a hallway between meteorology sessions. Dr. Lopez Lang is an expert on polar vortices, which are technically stratospheric phenomena that occur at least six miles above sea level. "But over the past decade people have started to describe it like cold air at ground level," she said.

Image"We need much clearer language, not buzzwords," said Cindy Bruyere, director of the Capacity Center for Climate and Weather Extremes at the National Center for Atmospheric Research.Credit...Stephen Speranza for The New York Times