[tjwebbnorfolk]

If you give any regularly-occurring event that varies in intensity enough time, it is guaranteed to break the records of its previous intensities.

[henry2023]

Yeah like earthquakes, the top registered earthquake happened 66 years ago.

The fact that you see record breaking more often than log of time implies a drift in one direction.

[simmerup]

And it varies in intensity because human activity is putting more energy into the system

[tjwebbnorfolk]

It varies in intensity because it always has.

[henry2023]

[flagged]

[tjwebbnorfolk]

What am I denying, exactly? This thread and the article pertain to El Nino. Is someone denying that El Nino exists?

[simmerup]

If it’s always varied in intensity, why are the ten hottest years on record all after 2015?

Surely we’d see random hot years all over the map.

[tjwebbnorfolk]

This thread and the article are discussing about El Nino, not global average temperatures.

[simmerup]

You really don’t see how they’re related? Fair enough.

[tjwebbnorfolk]

I guess I need a disclaimer on every comment that says "climate change is obviously real you can save your downvotes" jfc

[ubertaco]

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.