Apocalypse is a strong word for a post that ends with no real prediction.
As you might guess, this drove me nuts. In both cases it eventually blew up in their faces and the events proved to be free of side effects. Their imperative colleagues did not have the same mindsets.
If those two shops are in any way representative, then it may perhaps be worth considering very carefully if keeping cool new technologies away from serious usage could in some scenarios be a win.
I don't think these tools are the answer though, they make it easy for CISOs to look good, driving down the number, but is it real security?
You really need experts thinking about the security of your app. Ideally someone who thinks like a hacker.
In my limited and less-than-universal experience as a security person thinking like a hacker, those scanners can and do enable real security enhancements. Keeping up on your patching is real security, as is having a system that can point out which inputs you didn't validate and what code paths they're on. Couple them with someone with the right experience and background, and you have the basis of a real application security program!
Which is to say that you're absolutely right. Having the right person in the right place is absolutely critical. I think it be possible that it might not always be sufficient.
Most of the time they end up making a 20 page report with 500 issues that nobody reads because 499 of the issues are stupid.
(However, they can work if highly tuned to specific environment and workflow)