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.