General Discussion

We've commandeered so much of the planet's natural resources that we've kicked off a mass extinction event to rival the loss of the dinosaurs. And we've altered the atmosphere so much that we've locked in several degrees of warming over the next century that threaten to make large parts of the planet too hot for humans to inhabit.

Your own argument betrays you. Even if we managed our resources better today, you still call for ever-increasing population growth for the sake of more growth. Eventually that model runs out of resources, no matter how well they're managed. Except if the population hits this limit at 16 billion instead of 8 billion, the crash will be even bigger, and almost nothing of the natural world would remain.

I keep seeing the planet Corsecant from Star Wars in this argument: a world paved over by a global city from pole to pole to support a population of tens of billions.