Except that isn’t what it did.
It was a simple and correct explanation of why there isn’t a valid comparison, because the historical data is biased towards the maximum numbers, where more recent data doesn’t have as much bias, because there is less aggregation of the data.
The summary of Pedros post is in the last line:
It was the earlier poster that tried to use the data for comparison. Pedro was pointing out how that isn’t valid.
Guess it’s worth a second read.