The Ragnarök Question Series series features questions about the following risks, of which a majority are mostly anthropogenic (i.e. created by humans):

This notably omits risks that have been discussed in the relevant literature, such as non-anthropogenic risks (such as supervolcanoes, solar flares, asteriod impacts) as well as various anthropogenic ones (such as chemical warfare, conventional warfare, civilizational collapse, amongst others).

In the first part of the Ragnarök Question Series, we asked the question If a global catastrophe occurs, will it be due to "other risk"? Now it is asked,

Given that an catastrophe occurs caused by "other risks" that results in the reduction of global population of at least 10% by 2100, will the global population decline by more than 95% relative to the pre-catastrophe population?

The question resolves ambiguous if a catastrophe that claims at least 10% (in any period of 5 years or less) that is caused by "other" causes does not occur. It resolves positively if such a catastrophe does occur, and the global population is less than 95% of the pre-catastrophe population at any point within 25 years of the catastrophe.

The question resolves negative if a global catastrophe caused by "other risks" occurs that claims at least 10% (in any period of 5 years or less) the post-catastrophe population remains above 5% of the pre-catastrophe population over the subsequent 25 years.

This question is part of the Ragnarök Question Series. Check out the other questions in the series:

Also, please check out our questions on whether a global catastrophe will occur by 2100, and if so, which?:

All results are analysed here, and will be updated periodically.