Y2K had no effect on me whatsoever so essentially predictions of armageddon were unfounded. If we all had a collective sigh of relief then I wouldn't have made the comparison.
On the other point, no-one has made it clear what the goal of tackling climate change is. Does anyone know? Is it to reduce temperature? Is it to reduce sea levels? Is it to have more ice?
Or as I suspect, is the argument for tackling climate change the same as tackling masturbation to avoid loss of eyesight?
Y2K had little effect on anyone, but that is only because billions of pounds and years of effort were spent identifying and rectifying the affected software. Many of us involved did experience a sigh of relief once it was obvious that the fixes had worked. As it turned out, the only problem experienced by the organisation I worked for happened because a few lines of software in a sub-routine, in an obscure piece of application software, for an even more obscure product, were not identified and corrected. Fortunately, only a handful of people were offered a renewal quote for 99 years of car insurance for one year's premium.
And the point I made was about informed opinion. If you believed the hysteria about planes dropping out of the sky then you would have been confused about the issue.
As for your points on climate change, I'm sure someone with more scientific knowledge could explain it better than me (or you could read through the previous thread someone has provided a link to). The point is that the scientific community has discovered a link between the amount of carbon mankind has been pumping into the atmosphere and the rate of climate change. As I understand it, steps are being taken to reduce present and future carbon emissions in attempt to help stop a process that could be disastrous for human civilisation.