I'm not talking about height, I'm talking about rate if change. The height is concerning regardless but the rate of change is the link to anthropomorphic clima

I'm not talking about height, I'm talking about rate if change. The height is concerning regardless but the rate of change is the link to anthropomorphic climate change. If it's shown that this rate of change is not unprecedented, the link to human causes is less solid. I'm not here to say CO2 isn't a greenhouse gas and that humans aren't likely responsible for current and future warming, I'm pointing out that there are plenty of people who believe the same as me but to a degree that is not supported scientifically. The data fits the co2 hypothesis great but Baysian reasoning also must account for other models that fit the data as well and must even include the prospect that there are other unknown causes that could produce the effect, as there clearly are given the thoroughly precedented nature of our current situation.