Sorry if I'm resurrecting a dead thread and only using new words to reiterate arguments that have already been put forward, but it seems to me that the problem with the Carter Catastrophe is that it implies that the future or present probability of something is somehow altered by the probability of the chain of events leading up to it.
If I roll three six sided dice in a row, the chance of getting a 6 the last roll is still 1 in 6, not 1 in 216, no matter if I already rolled 6 twice in a row before.
Really... isn't any attempt to calculate the probability of any event or outcome based on anything but the probabilites of the direct physical factors that matter to the specific outcome/event in question inherently meaningless, and a matter of "confusing the map with the territory"?