Droughts, wildfires, hurricanes/typhoons seem as real to me as "scientists" continue to squabble. Critical viewpoints are integral to the "integrity of science", but without application/action where is the actual contribution?
Maybe the article authors are suggesting: just set at RCP2.6 or favor the IEA baseline range and call it a day? I would think they would lose funding, speaker fees, followers, etc...
One missing variable in the socioeconomic assumption input to RCP assessment is the proliferation of dis/mis information or lack of open data access.
As the west looks on, some global partners are displaying excellence in cooperative data sharing and full disclosure on consumption patterns to help inform policy development: https://youtu.be/gfIoS9NB0Wg
Stick that in RCP input.