I read Factfulness, by Hans Rosling. It goes through and explains a number of cognitive biases and statistical method no-nos. It then uses examples of these to show how the world is a much better place and improving at a better pace than people realise, or more accurately, are willing to accept as truth. Hans Rosling did a lot of conferences where he took a lot of surveys, with questions like what percentage of the global population gets at least one vaccination, what percentage of girls get at least six years of education, and what global life expectancy is.
Dismally, a lot of the groups surveyed, including economists, journalists, Nobel laureates, and UN workgroups did worse on average than they would have if they just randomly guessed on each answer (each question was multiple choice with 3 answers avaiable). Strangely, I know that I would have gotten absolutely a majority of the questions correct. I might have been somewhat biased merely by the premise of the book into thinking of the most optimistic answer in most questions (of course, one of them dealing with climate change had the most pessimist as the answer), but even without that bias, I still think I would've gotten most of them correct. I do consider myself reasonably well-read, but it's also probably that I expect technology will pick up the pace and improve quickly enough to overcome a lot of the degradation humans have done (for context, while I expect global temperatures will get hotter, I also think CO2 emissions are broadly flatlining and will soon come down, and in 3-4 decades we'll have so much cheap energy we will literally be ripping out billions of tons of carbon out of the year and putting it back in the ground).