The question isn't where the point of no return is - we've been beyond those the whole time. The question is how bad we want to let it get. Ever fraction of a degree extra warming means worse impacts.

Agree that less than +2°C is unlikely (though not completely impossible). But still, better that than +2.5°C, etc.

Ehhhh, I'm sure it will be fine. 😎

Or tell us to construction satellite to collect solar energy and beam it down.

The Author's Note section of State of Fear, Michael Crichton made numerous predictions that some of which have come true thus far.

It was published in 2004

One of which is that any climate change related legislation implemented by one party, will eventually overturned / reversed when the other party takes power.

Nothing is more inherently political than our shared physical environment, and nothing is more ill served by allegiance to a single political party. Precisely because the environment is shared it cannot be managed by one faction according to its own economic or aesthetic preferences. Sooner or later, the opposing faction will take power, and previous policies will be reversed. Stable management of the environment requires recognition that all preferences have their place: snowmobilers and fly fishermen, dirt bikers and hikers, devel-opers and preservationists. These preferences are at odds, and their incompatibility cannot be avoided. But resolving incompatible goals is a true function of politics

He also predicted that in around 2100, people will be far richer, use lots of energy than ever before, and the global population will be much smaller.