You must be thinking, “Oh, this know-nothing has gone crazy. Obviously he does not know a cloud burst is more of a meteorological phenomenon rather than a climatic one.”
There is a saying in Tamil that may be inelegantly translated as, “Tie the shin and the tonsured head.” That is, desperately connect disparate things. I am notorious for this. So, please bear with me.
Yesterday, as per reports, the clouds burst over the airport in Delhi. It was raining torrentially elsewhere too in the region but no other locality got an 11 cm downpour inside of one hour. If you recall, we had a cloud burst in Himachal Pradesh (I may not be locating it correctly, but it was somewhere up there) a few years ago. Prior to that it was in Mumbai. Now, it has happened in Delhi.
And, in my 45 years of living in India, the Mumbai event was my first experience, even if it be vicariously as I was far from Mumbai, of a cloud burst. Is a cloud burst an event of 50 year return period? And, what is the spatial extent that should be considered for that return period? I haven’t a clue but it is sort of irrelevant as I try to tie up a few things.
I am wondering whether the frequency of cloud bursts is a climatic measure. Note that I am being very specific. It is the frequency of the event in a region that I am concerned about. We have strong reasons to suspect that rainfall patterns are changing, both spatially and temporally. Is the frequent occurrence of cloud bursts one of the extreme weather measures that climate scientists would consider as a step towards establishing global warming? I do not know.
I believe Mumbai treats Ganesh Chaturti as the end of the monsoon season. But the celebration has come and gone and yet it is raining in many places across the country, including Mumbai. We must remember that the marking the end of the monsoon with this celebration already accommodates variations, because as per the Gregorian calendar it can be anytime between mid August and mid September.
It is not just this year and it is not just monsoon. About 20 years ago, beginning of October was when people started adding a layer of clothing to protect their bodies. Now, it is at least late October before Fall jackets come out of storage in Delhi (except for Bengalis!). Likewise very cold temperatures have been felt as late as March in Delhi.
I do not know whether any of these changes in weather patterns ARE indeed manifestations of global warming, incipient though it may be. Scientists are sort of convinced they are, but every pronouncement they make is tinged with this disclaimer, “No single weather event can be attributed to global warming.” Yes, heat wave, but cannot be sure it is because of global warming. Yes, flooding, but is it because of global warming? Don’t know. They are being truthful to a fault, and in the process, repeat the statement, “I/We do not know.”
The climate skeptics, driven as they are by very powerful and rich lobbies, mainly of hydrocarbon based industries on the supply side, and power generation companies and automobile industry on the demand side, are unscrupulously untruthful. The lobby latches onto the scientific uncertainties as proof of the certainty that there is no global warming; it is all a big hoax. Non-science is validated by the uncertainties of real science. Is this a logic you can support? If yes, I request you not to read further.
The business-friendly unscientific cabal says the scientists are not sure. True, but only to an extent. Climate scientists add a post-script to their assessment – we truly can feel the weather changing, many times as we have predicted and well within the error bands we had indicated. But this sub-disclaimer is buried in the cacophony of non-science.
Ask them why we have seen heat waves so frequently and with such intensity that events of 100 year return period seem to repeat in ten years. Likewise for rain, flooding, sustained drought, patterns of time-shifted blossoming of flowers etc. etc. Total silence. No effort to offer even a pseudo-explanation. Because, they do not know. But, unlike scientists they are not honest enough to admit they do not know. Yet, they have a following. I do not know how this can be.
What would you say? We prepare ourselves for the effects of global warming keeping in mind the whole thing could be false positive. Or, we should do the Business-As-Usual stuff and ignore all these Cassandras. The possibility of false negative goes unacknowledged.
Whether the frequency of cloud bursts is climate related, I do not know.
As you observed at the start of this post, I am a know-nothing and I have offered much proof supporting your assessment.
Yet, I am concluding without knowing that the frequency of cloud bursts is a climate change related measure. This is the desperate connection between the shin and tosured head.
I know at least one thing. I am a Cassandra.
Take that.
Raghuram Ekambaram
7 comments:
Raghuram,
20 years back, I thought that only Martians would use phones for more than 12 hours a day (since I was using slow computers then, I "knew" that humans would be glued to the computer). Am I trying to connect phones and climate change?
That is my desperate connection between the shin and tonsured head. :)))
During the last week, the whole of Trivandrum had a stench of rot and decay. The first explanation said that it was due to decaying algae caused by changes in sea salt level. The second and supposedly more scientific explanation is that it is a result of small tremors and minor upheavals within the earth (passing the wind, in colloquial terms, I guess).
The interesting part are th rumours: one, this is a sign of an oncoming tsunami; two, ah, the devaprasnam at Padmanabhaswamy Temple, of course; three, bad people in kali yuga; four, climate change...and so on.
I talked to the fisherwomen who come to my house and they say that "it happens". I too think it is not the first time. Rare, unpleasant but it happens.
That is my view about cloud bursts and moderate to extreme changes in heat, cold and rain. I am sure it follows a power-law : an event of any magnitude is quite probable.
Of course, that does not mean that I do not believe in global warming. And if the aye-sayers are finding it more difficult than the nay-sayers, that is the way science always works, right? The aye-sayer should do more work make a theory believable.
I think I have quoted the following from the book "Solar" on your page elsewhere:
`You ’re not convinced. Here’s the worst case. Suppose the near impossible – the thousand are wrong and the one is right, the data are all skewed, there’s no warming. It’s a mass delusion among scientists, or a plot. Then we still have the old stand-bys. Energy security, air pollution, peak oil.’
Well, that's how I believe in global warming even without scientific proof.
Cheerio
(phew! This is too long...isn't there a law which says that a comment should not be longer than the blog? :)) Well, I do like long discussions...)
Arjun, that is precsiely the reason I said, "I believe!". I understand that extreme events (Black swans) happen; my point is if a number of 50 year return period events bunch up within 5 years and at least in some cases returning in much less than 50 years how do we work out the probability of a putative phenomenon (here it is AGW) being the driver?
Global warming cannot ever be proven - not because it is beyond science, but because of the power of the hydrocarbon lobby, the gullibility of people in these unscientific times (in the sense RFP uses this adjective).
I liked your comment, long or not except for one thing - you implicitly equated AGW with Devaprasnam :)))
Thanks a lot.
Raghuram Ekambaram
PS Perhaps the one thing I missed by being divorced from Sulekha was your deep analysis, even if you do not admit to it.
We are still to accept the reality that science has only touched the periphery of causal realities. 'salt doll diving in the ocean' to understand the depth of ocean, is the analogy that comes to mind when I come across these superstitions backed up by mindless peripheral pseudo scientific forays.
recently I saw an article that eating dark chocolate is equal to exhausting yourself doing an exercise. Was it the chocolate lobby speaking in the voice of science- I wonder.
So from my tonsured head, let me come out with a conjecture for the cloud burst. There is a saying in Tamil that "for the sake of good men the rain god bestows his goodness to all"So the cloud burst is the result of occasional spotting of a good man by the rain god. plane...I hope I have reached somewhere near the toe...
in my comment a wingless plane has crept in ..please delete that form your mind when you read the para.
DS sir, to the extent I have observed people around me it is mainly the non-scientific who do not accept that science has severe limitations. Science lierates say, "We don't know" and proceed to knowing further. It is no one's case that science has not traversed many a paths leading to dead ends. Science is a risky adventure,driven by hopes, springing eternally. Climate science only hopes that potential nightmares can be identified and possibly not allow humanity to be asleep.
Thanks sir.
Raghuram Ekambaram
Hmm..frequency change of cloud bursts. I think there are way too many possible measures for climate change. Without all this fossil fuel burning, climate has changed many a time in the past and I presume it will continue to do so. I also believe that there is nothing I can do about it and hence do not worry about it. I have no idea if and by how much, environment degradation contributes to climate change. But since I can play a part in lessening environment degradation, I do that.I have to admit that I read about climate change and off and on and indulge in CIT (continuous irrelevant talk) about it - while breaking wind? I leave that to your imagination:)
True Amrit, but when you think about from the other end, how the earth "came alive", one could understand, rightly or wrongly, this as a reverse (but ironically an irreversible) process of how the earth's ecosphere manufactured O2 and the earth cooled. Basically, the CO2 emissions are taking the space that O2 occupies. It is no one's case that it has not happened before, this warming and colling cycles (irregular), but no evidence exists for as rapid a change asw e are experiencing for the past two centuries. Is this mere coincidence or correlation? That is the big question.
I can drink you under the table on CIL!
Thanks.
Raghuram Ekambaram
Post a Comment