I suppose we can probably end the bad faith argument here pretty readily. Your claim is that there is at least one internet commentator who made a prediction i

I suppose we can probably end the bad faith argument here pretty readily. 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...