Instead of looking at them as science, try understanding their mechanism in terms of principles. The way they function.
A human could be compared to a motor vehicle in terms of being machines. The study f them are branches of science. The approach to studying them is similar .But there are also major differences between biological functions and mechanical ones.
Everything in meteorology is identifiable and measurable. And the “rules” can be identified, clarified and the results predictable to a very high degree of accuracy.
Most of the data needed to form the theory of evolution is not visible. Scientist cannot use the same methods to identify what went on in the distant past with the same certainty as they can with a thunderstorm. The data is not available and the variable have different components. No one has ever seen a fish develop into a new type of creature. They have seen mutations in creatures (not necessarily fish). They have seen how a beak can vary in shape and size (Not fish at all). They have seen that some feature can be advantageous or not depending on circumstance (environment etc, not specific to fish) but they have not witnessed the full evolutionary change. All they have done is pieced together an idea of it. They have theorised
But it is still theory. It may be the best they can come up with, but it is still theory. It cannot be fact. It cannot be proven for certain. There is no means to watch it happen. The data is just not there Meteorology is as near certain as it is possible to be. On as scale of 1-10 Meteorology is at 10 Evolution is nearer 4.
Meteorology and evolution are not the same in terms of certainty
But that is only half the difference.
You are refusing to view any science from any perspective other than science. (The dogma about how to criticise a scientific theory) The other differences between meteorology and evolutionary science are esoteric. They cannot be viewed by a scientific method. Philosophy transcends both science and theology. It can sit in both worlds and bridge them.
There is a philosophy of evolution. Meteorology has no philosophical elements.
Natural Selection is more philosophy than pure science. It is trying to include elements that are not data. Survival is not data. Being advantageous is not data.
The controlling elements of meteorology are identifiable and measurable. You can measure temperature and barometric pressure and use that data. You cannot measure adaptability. You cannot measure herd dynamics. You cannot measure competition for resources.
Each situation in evolution is different. Meteorology has a specific setting with specific boundaries.
El Ninio and the Jet streams are both forms of wind but that is the only similarity between them. You are trying to compare sciences in the same narrow manner.