You could replace number of data centers with total number of Taylor Swift songs released and get that same idea. Taylor Swift music existing causes dizziness, and it must be stopped.
Or you could replace number of data centers with “Sean Connery alive?” and decide dizziness has been going up since he died. He was somehow guarding the world against becoming dizzy, and we lost that protection when he passed. :/
Putting two random things on a chart like this doesn’t actually show or imply anything, other than that the person who made it likely wants you to believe there’s some kind of connection.
You are trying to say it’s a coincidence, and that’s probably correct. But it’s perfectly possible that the interest in datacenters leads to an interest in dizziness, or that they are related by some hidden variable.
But it really doesn’t.
You could replace number of data centers with total number of Taylor Swift songs released and get that same idea. Taylor Swift music existing causes dizziness, and it must be stopped.
Or you could replace number of data centers with “Sean Connery alive?” and decide dizziness has been going up since he died. He was somehow guarding the world against becoming dizzy, and we lost that protection when he passed. :/
Putting two random things on a chart like this doesn’t actually show or imply anything, other than that the person who made it likely wants you to believe there’s some kind of connection.
Eh…
It doesn’t get anything similar to the same result.
https://trends.google.com.br/trends/explore?date=today+5-y&q=dizziness%2CSean+Connery+alive%3F&hl=pt-BR
You are trying to say it’s a coincidence, and that’s probably correct. But it’s perfectly possible that the interest in datacenters leads to an interest in dizziness, or that they are related by some hidden variable.
… You seem to be assuming Google search frequencies are the only reasonable metric to measure the increase of a thing in the world.