People claimed to know what caused sickness, and how to cure it, for a very long time. They claimed to know how the Earth was created. They claimed to know the fundamental elements which combined to form all matter.

All of these pre-scientific theories were wrong. But we don't reject modern medicine, cosmology and atomic theory because of it. Humanity's history of doomsday predictions has no more bearing on the science of climate change than the former practice of leeching has on modern treatment of septicaemia.

Thats a hell of a stretch. When have scientists predicted the end of the world? There was the population explosion fear, that third world countries wouldn't slow down their birth rates. There was the ozone layer, but scientists were completely right about that and it had large impacts on affected populations. Increased cancer rates, loss of animal and plant life. There was a brief worry that the atomic bomb might light the atmosphere on fire, but they realized that was wrong pretty immediately.

At worst there was one prediction that was wrong, and that was only because it was based on sociology and psychology. That's not the same as global warming.

In geological terms, people have been predicting the end of the world for a very short time.

They've never had the amount of data, the power of modern science, and computer modeling to show how it plays out, to back up the claims before.

but modern humans have better technology to possibly prevent, mitigate, and or delay crisis

The current estimates take that into account. Continually claiming "technology will solve it" eventually fails to basic laws of physics, and cannot be the solution to every problem.

We don't seem to be deploying it that much, carbon emissions are continuing to rise.

And it's not enough. It just isn't.

The just as irrelevant counterpoint to your statement being: an end of the world prediction only has to be right once.

Luckily, most of us can deal with abstractions enough to understand that life is not FFF or 000.