Define "catastrophe". Is a thousand people dying a catastrophe? A million? Or does it take a billion?
If it's a thousand (or maybe even a million), we're already there just with air pollution. Forget CO2, particulates are already that level of catastrophe.
For just CO2 or global warming, there are projections (or, less charitably, guesses) about how much CO2 will lead to how much warming, which will lead to how many deaths. Pick your level of what constitutes a catastrophe to you, and then pick which projections you find most believable. For actual answers rather than projections, we'll have to wait until after it happens (at which point it's a bit late to try to do anything about it).
But my point was, there's different levels that are "catastrophic", depending on your definition of catastrophe. There is no one answer to the question.
A quick review shows that you were the first one to use the word "catastrophe" in this discussion. Neither Knufen nor diafygi used the word.
But if you insist on getting Knufen's definition of catastrophe, you should also get diafygi's, since diafygi posted the claim that we're arguing about in this sub-thread.
"we're now in a goddamn race for our lives as the nightmares of climate change are starting to happen"
"Catastrophe" is a suboptimal word choice.
What would you suggest?
Minor inconvenience, regrettable circumstances, potential nuisance, that gosh darn weather? Other?
--
SME diafygi, who has skin in the game, who completely rearranged his life to match his beliefs, posted very personal views. For his troubles, Knufen mocked him, thereby minimizing the circumstances, thereby proving diafygi's larger point.
The world's burning. And you're fussing over adjectives. More distraction. Again, proving diafygi's larger point.
