"a believer"? Dude this is not a matter of believe it or not. Facts and figures are there and don't really care if you or anyone else "believe" them or not. Woah...
You are dealing with people who don't believe in that sort of stuff and will happily misrepresent, distort, and paraphrase whatever numbers and facts you throw at them from whatever source fits their belief system best. People aren't rational. That's 99% of the problem right there. Look no further than the Whitehouse for that in action. Even environmentalists are spending disproportionate amounts of effort on things that fundamentally don't really help a lot. Yes it would be awefully nice if 7 billion people stopped eating meat but you shipping over avocados and quinoa to fuel your vegan lifestyle is probably not helping.
It actually matters very much if someone is a believer or not. I don’t know where you live, but in the U.S., we have so many people in denial that our efforts to curb the effects of climate change over the last 20 years are now being reversed. There’s not enough support anymore. If more people don’t start accepting this information as “facts”, this planet is in a world of hurt in the next 100 years.
Going both by surveys [1] and by informal chats with friends of all ages, the Millenials were the peak AGW / Global Climate Change generation, with the subsequent generation (Gen Z) being both less convinced and less likely to demand expensive, global action. The picture is muddied a bit as Gen Z does does demand good care of environment, for general reasons (unspecific to AGW), thus sharing certain talking and policy points with AGW believers.
Talking with a Gen-Z'r, expect AGW to be sooner taken as a meme, and given ironic support only, rather than taken straight. The general feel is that Millenials went off the rails with certain topics and thus significantly lowered the credibility of the related talking points. It's not helped by the impression that the centralized media (like cable and big online platforms, basically "boomer" media) paint one picture with simplistic, sharp divisions, while the decentralized media (social media, new style online media) paints more complex, and more convincing picture.
I expect the shift away form belief in AGW to continue in subsequent generations.
No they are not. Simply no! Wanna some really good and useful icons? Go get them at KDE. Those... Things sucks. Big. Time. Is that some hipster phoney nostalgia article of some sort? Please...
Understanding and Managing Emotions. Interesting. Too bad the author do not focus at all on HOW TO UNDERSTAND AND MANAGE emotions and the subtle and misleading assumption is that understanding and managing emotions is something that everyone can do it on the fly. Nothing more false. It takes a proper knowledge, schooling, education and training to do that. So, again, in a way or in another (and by reading the article) we must unavoidably return to IQ ergo to pure intelligence. QED.
The sample size and (likely) lack of diversity in the group is already pretty weak. Even so I found the brief part about IQ being associated with openness to experience interesting. The article is surface deep for sure but I don’t think it insinuates that understanding and managing emotions doesn’t require work/education. I think their mention of introspection being potentially linked to IQ could be related to the point you’re making here
