3 ms·
If you give any regularly-occurring event that varies in intensity enough time, it is guaranteed to break the records of its previous intensities.
by tjwebbnorfolk 3mo ago
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 3mo agoYeah 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.
- jmye 3mo ago[dead]
- simmerup 3mo agoAnd it varies in intensity because human activity is putting more energy into the system
- tjwebbnorfolk 3mo agoIt varies in intensity because it always has.
- henry2023 3mo ago[flagged]
- tjwebbnorfolk 3mo agoWhat am I denying, exactly? This thread and the article pertain to El Nino. Is someone denying that El Nino exists?
- simmerup 3mo agoIf 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 3mo agoThis thread and the article are discussing about El Nino, not global average temperatures.
- ubertaco 3mo agoYou 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.
- simmerup 3mo agoYou really don’t see how they’re related? Fair enough.
- tjwebbnorfolk 3mo agoI guess I need a disclaimer on every comment that says "climate change is obviously real you can save your downvotes" jfc