(Sorry this got so long, I got nerd-sniped once again, and I'm not even really disagreeing with you, I think.)

How are historically high CO2 emissions used to justify continued high emissions? I could imagine the only argument here that could be made would be by countries that have not yet emitted as much as other countries, and in some way one might even be inclined to say that they are right. Even if it's the wrong approach.

Also what you posted are yearly CO2 emissions, what @DupaCycki@lemmy.world was talking about is cumulative emissions. Granted, even there it's not nearly as clear cut as 92% for rich countries, but still considerable.

According to ourworldindata USA and EU (I think that does not include the UK any more) are still in the lead, but you are right, if the trend continues that's just a matter of time. However even then, when it comes down to population, USA + EU are way less people than China, and when summing USAs and EUs emissions , it will take way longer for china to "catch up"... I'm not even sure where I'm going with this, just trying to give some perspective.

However overall I still have to agree with you - eventually comparing CO2 emissions of countries with each other does not make too much sense. Not because those countries aren't at fault, rather because manufacturing and consumption is not tied to countries any more. Even within countries CO2 emissions vary a lot by purchase power.