>If you give any regularly-occurring event that varies in intensity enough time, it is guaranteed to break the records of its previous intensities.
I don't even have to add emphasis myself, you already did.
Someone then named a regularly-occurring event of varying intensity (summer is hot), and pointed out that the data shows the opposite of your explanation (i.e. this isn't random variance causing random spikes; this is a continuous increasing trend).
You then said, effectively, "not that regularly-occurring event of varying intensity!"
Kinda seems like you're moving the goalposts a bit.
alt Hacker News
You said:
>If you give any regularly-occurring event that varies in intensity enough time, it is guaranteed to break the records of its previous intensities.
I don't even have to add emphasis myself, you already did.
Someone then named a regularly-occurring event of varying intensity (summer is hot), and pointed out that the data shows the opposite of your explanation (i.e. this isn't random variance causing random spikes; this is a continuous increasing trend).
You then said, effectively, "not that regularly-occurring event of varying intensity!"
Kinda seems like you're moving the goalposts a bit.