Except this is kinda important, and so we must pay attention to less likely worse case scenarios.
You don't just stroll through the minefield because somebody said that the most likely result is going to be you passing the field unharmed, and there is just 10% chance you get blown into pieces.
Another reason for paying attention to worst case scenarios is that most people just don't get it. And so it makes sense to oversell it a little bit if the end result is that there is less chance 1B people starve.
I think it is fine as long as these scenarios are plausible and grounded in truth.
maybe not plausible for 2100 but indeed plausible for 2200 (Nontheless, I still think that runaway effects aka black swan events might make 4-5 degree scenarios more probable than usually accounted for in these studies). Yes, fatalism is bad but so is our collective entrapment in capitalism in its current form. It cannot be that we still are not taxing luxuries wrt to CO2 equivalent and using these taxes to fund mitigation. We are stuck in our ways and everyone knows it, it's literally insanity. However, the coming desasters will prove to bring change slowly but surely. So there's that at least.
You don't just stroll through the minefield because somebody said that the most likely result is going to be you passing the field unharmed, and there is just 10% chance you get blown into pieces.
Another reason for paying attention to worst case scenarios is that most people just don't get it. And so it makes sense to oversell it a little bit if the end result is that there is less chance 1B people starve.
I think it is fine as long as these scenarios are plausible and grounded in truth.