Let's say I did read "those thread". If I were then to come back and say "nope - it all checked out, the histrionics were in your head." I'd wager you would respond by saying I read the wrong threads. I doubt you are willing to engage in a good-faith discussion further at this point. I'm not sure exactly which point you are making, which threads you are thinking, and I'm certainly not going to go try to find the evidence for a very vague claim that you are making.
Your claim is that there is at least one internet commentator who made a prediction in potentially bad faith, pearl clutching, where that prediction did not bear fruit. This is based on examples which you recollect.
Can you claim that this is a phenomenon that is a majority opinion, or even widespread? You would be doing so based on examples, which is cherry-picking. In addition, using human recollection only introduces confirmation-bias.
In contrast, an article that sites something like 20 different studies, which shows that indeed a number of negative outcomes did occur is a very different basis for making statements.
Rule of thumb, unless you have data - you don't know, and if you think you do, you're probably wrong. Therefore those that claim big things without giving data...