Firstly: in your post you implied that the article was BY Sanjay Limaye - the article is just a TOI piece where it looks like they called up a couple of contacts and asked for info.

Second the article is all of 20 lines long - a little short to display all the stats on climate change don’t you think?

Third you link to a site which shows a trend line for a couple of months and offer it up as ‘data’?? You should join NOAA or NASA - those poor fools have been busy using data from the last century.

So Yazad I appreciate your trying to ‘fisk’ an article - but please try to have the vaguest of ideas of what you are talking about. You are great at politics and economics literature but it is rapidly becoming apparent that statistics and science are not your forte (BTW have you ever done a stats course or used a computer-based modelling tool - I strongly suspect that the answer is a no but feel free to surprise me :).

So blame the TOI for a shoddy job at reporting but don’t attack somebody whose work area you obviously know nothing about. But since you are at it would you like to critique Dr. Limayes work on atmospheric circulation on Venus. I’m sure you can find many holes in his theories ;) based on your training and deep understanding of the field ;).

I linked to the article itself. So I can’t be accused of misrepresentation. That the article was written by Limaye was your assumption. Don’t blame me for it.

Who wants all the stats? One line would be enough. If he was observing the monsoon in India, it would be very easy for him to state something like “rainfall in Mumbai has declined by 17% in the last 5 years” instead of making anecdotal statements.

The Regional Meteorological Centre has many other links on the sidebar. Click away — you’ll find 30 year trends. They don’t have an index page for that section so I was forced to link to the first table instead.

If the remanining part of your comment was just ad hominem I’d have ignored it. It’s a downright lie as you know that I’ve studied both statistics and econometrics. Remember that you were a few years junior to me in both St. Xavier’s and Mumbai University? You can make your point without cheap pot shots. Or maybe it’s just not possible?

Now if you had actually done any serious modelling using computers (sorry some random proofs like we did in Xavier’s a 3 line problem in Bombay U do not count) you would have realized that you can’t go around making simplistic statements like you make. I have spent many a long nights in a computer lab running simulations which by scientific standards are simple - but even these use to take about 30 minutes to run on a PIII machine.

You are all about soundbites

rainfall in Mumbai has declined by 17% in the last 5 years

That is fine to say but a scientist or a statistician would never make a statement like that and expect it to mean anything. Decline by 17% relative to when? What is the sample size. Did it account for cyclical fluctuations? Did you use a floaing average or a weighted average? What are the constraints on your model?

So you may think you have studied what passes for statistics in Xavier’s and no doubt it is enough to get you by in your current profession but you get into trouble when you start taking on a real scientist or statistician as you have done numerous times in the past and tried to use simplistic sound bites of information to make a point. All well and good for a blog I suppose but I think you should accept your limitations in this field. Maybe…just perhaps there are some things you don’t know ;)

Another point is that there is hardly ever any consensus in science. Science thrives on inproving current ideas, proving set notions incorrect or discovering situations that current knowledge fails to explain. For example, even Newton’s theories of motion or understanding of gravity changed significantly in early 20th century.

Unfortunately, lobbyists from industry and eco-watch groups misuse data in a way it makes science into nons(ci)ence.
[Much of my argument is borrowed from posts and comments on this site]

I find it despicable. That’s why I fear for the economic growth of india. Because if someone has a good idea the first thing he is going to be asked are his qualifications.

And elsewhere in the world nobody ever asks for qualifications?? No its not an Indian phenomenon to ask for qualifications - it is a rational worldwide phenomenon - which is why Yazad is posting his opinions on a blog as opposed to working for NASA or NOAA - he is qualified to post whatever he likes on his blog but is obviously not qualified to be a rocket scientist.

The example I gave is a soundbite — a stump. What I was saying is that I’d be happy even if he gave that. But he gives worse — anecdotes.

And, qualifications do matter, but are not the “end-all” — the substance of the idea is important as well.