sure, but you can't categorize the threat based on some looming unknowns. You either have an idea of when you'll hit some point and the consequences or you don't - you can't just say "the unknowns are the greatest threat" because they are unknowns and by definition you don't know anything about them
Are there unknowns that are likely huge threats? Maybe, maybe not. Who's to say?
Citation of a climatologist pointing to a known tipping point that says the tipping point is the greatest threat?
I'm certainly not saying tipping points aren't a threat, but who would claim to know the greatest threat inside of climatology? I mean we have dozens of unaccounted for nuclear warheads from the cold war era and you'd have me believe there are qualified people stating they know what the greatest threat is and it's some tipping point that will set off global warming?
ah that's fair - I misspoke - I was intending this entire topic to be around climate sensationalism which is what my first comment was about.
Of course climatologists are pointing to some very serious issues, but they also understand those to be modeled projections and potential outcomes. The most dire models are indeed alarming and of course it is their job to sound the alarm. It's everyone else's job to use their relevant experience to decide just how important those alarms are. If we've learned anything from this pandemic it should be that alarmist models can very well make every headline but still fail to predict the future.
Are there unknowns that are likely huge threats? Maybe, maybe not. Who's to say?