Only 4% of the US population hunts for themselves anymore. There are only 800,000 sworn LEO in the US (including Feds). Only 13% of adults have an advanced degree while the population response to polls is 30% or more possess such a degree.
Even today our daily beliefs of our society are off from “truth”. But direct collaboration is easy to see. It calls into question the value of social story and theories, imo.
The beliefs they implant are always “wrong” and yet society keeps on going.
Why is it amazing to you? The question is literally totally irrelevant to any practical modern-day political question or decision.
It's not like that's the only way to get to anti-environmentalism (e.g. "Why should we preserve lands for future generations, when I'll be dead by then?"). IMHO, indifference (of which I gave only one example) is a far bigger problem than any belief in the possibility of a deus ex machina solution (e.g. "Don't worry, we'll technology our way out of it. We always have before.").
I just wrote one quick example of the effects that belief in creationism roughly correlate with. The idea that mankind can't damage the Earth because it's God's creation is another one.
It could be that the evolution of life has been orchestrated over billions of years by some sentient thing. But a 10,000-year old simulation of a detailed reality that appears to stretch back 13 or so billion years, vs the actual reality itself, boy does the simulation seem so much less believable.
Do you think that "burn down all the trees because Jesus is coming," is a common attitude among creationists?
If you do, it seems like an unwarranted leap without more data. IMHO, there's nothing about believing that the world was created 10,000 years ago that implies the end of the world is very imminent, and the kind attitudes you describe only make sense that context.
In any case, my intuition says that various kinds of quotidian short-term thinking and unwillingness to make personal sacrifices would be much bigger cause for rejecting environmentalism than any kind of hard ideological reasoning (like religion).
And in this case, the imminent doomsday argument for anti-environmentalism really feels like a backwards justification for policy preferences chosen for other reasons.
But no, it's an example of one thing that I believe is more common among creationists than non-creationists, because creationists overlap with nutbags who are evangelical more than non-creationists do. How do you otherwise arrive at the belief in the 10,000 year span?