I acknowledged that the school isn't well known. There is also something called Google where you can search for things you don't know about.
Sorry about talking down but you have seemed to miss the entire point of my argument. Even though the school isn't well known, I said they can search for the name if they don't know about it.
>Indian schools are know for suppling large US software companies with cheap labour - often below market value
I don't know how this suddenly came into the argument. If this was some remote university in Russia, my point would still stand. You seem to have a very prejudiced view of Indian universities. Please educate yourself. You aren't being mean, just ignorant. Indian schools are also known for producing world-class engineers.
Not just software. Google, Microsoft, Adobe, Pepsico, Mastercard. Do you know what they have in common? A CEO educated in an Indian University.
>Indian "scientists" has a better connotations than the specific school, whose reputations are unknown or second rate
We shouldn't do that has better connotations but what's right. And acknowledging the achievements of a university is what is right.
>this immediately questions the rigour and relevance of their work.
That's your problem. Any scientific work must stand independent of whoever publishes it. Yes, screening process gets easier, but the questioning the accuracy must be accompanied by proper arguments, not bias.
Do you really think a country with three times the population of the US doesn't have any scientific achievements? Just recently there was a huge rocket launched with a fraction of the budget of the science department of a US university.