An intelligent friend found this argument about the climate crisis plausible

[NickB79]

7. This assumption here is flat-out bullshit, rendering the entire argument moot

After 2050, the rate of temperature rise will slow down and approach stagnation by 2100.

The study of climate tipping points and positive feedback loops has shown pretty solidly that stagnation will NOT occur. So many positive feedback loops are now kicking in that Nature itself will not only lose much of it's ability to to keep sequestering carbon, but will in many instances start to release it by the billions of tons annually, independent of human action. For example:

The Amazon rainforest is now likely crossed a tipping point of transitioning to savannah, burning in the process and releasing carbon.
The Arctic permafrost is currently thawing, venting CO2 and methane.
The boreal forests are dying of beetle infestation and drought, burning in the process and releasing carbon.
The Antarctic ice melt is short-circuiting the southern polar ocean currents, reducing the ability of the ocean to pull carbon deep down.

SSP2-4.5 is ONLY taking into account human emissions, with the (asinine) assumption that the planet will continue to sequester the same amount of carbon in the future 100 years that it did in the past 100 years. This is an extremely dangerous assumption.