Your writing is no worse than mine, and it tends to avoid my use of exaggerating and siding to arguments that are a bit inflammatory and a bit off context just enough to provoke argument.

___

I'll have to give you that the number of people may not continue to rise. However, I do suspect that the end of the increase is due to us reaching "peak people per land". If technologies allow for much cheaper food, and robotic care for children becomes popular, I can see an explosion in kids again occurring.

What is bad though, both objectively and morally, is unsustainable behavior.

I was not refering to unsustainable behavior there, but the idea that animals, creatures, forests, and so on, have some right to exist, and that human beings are/should be of equal consideration. A human should not destroy a forest to build a home, for example, as it kills many animals, drives them from their homes.

My point is that all humans do this, to live, we must kill huge numbers of animals, be it through growing crops to feed animals to feed us, or growing crops to feed us. We kill when we drive cars, when we clean our homes of pests, it's what we are, it's what we do.

No. We have a hard enough time as it is trying to upscale batteries and manufacturing techniques.

I do not refer to the modern day, the idea that we should disrespect and disregard nature today, as we don't have the capability to replace it's purpose, yet.

We have a hard enough time making these batteries and manufacturing techniques. But look at why we do those things, we have, for the first time ever, between any other species, recognized a global climate shift, and are working to counteract it.

That's a massive sign of humanities development as a species, and a hopeful beginning of what is to come. Of a species in total control of its planet, to access all it's resources.

I'm not saying we have it today, or should work to it today, only that it is going to happen, and when it does, it will be far better than having nature still around.

Imagine telling someone in the early/mid 1900's that mankind will have a network of machines, speaking to each other, communication between nations that goes on instantly, being able to call someone up through this network and tell them something, to order your bank account in another nation to give you money. It would seem insane, unreasonable, impossible. How many people would have to work in such a network?

The society of the 2100's is going to seem just as insane, unreasonable, as today's society seems to those in the 1900's.

Nature is working on a mechanism that has developed over millions of years

And we have, in only a few thousand, managed to absolutely dominate nearly all of that which existed in nature. Our society grows at a rate nature has never known, not relying on random chance and natural selection, but active and determined memory and construction. Imagine evolution making a species capable of doing all the things a kid coming out of high school could do. It would take until the end of the planet, of life.

Our societies are networks of individuals acting together on a scale so massive it spans the entire planet. We are sensitive to things so much larger than any individual, just through communication, and we are the only species known to do so. We harness sources of energy that sat buried for hundreds of thousands, perhaps even millions, of years go.

And it didn't take more than a few centuries to accomplish most of it!

In a few more, I'd be willing to bet we will figure out and learn to take care for a whole lot more of nature than you would expect, especially if we royally screw up and cause a crisis/collapse that forces us to figure it out and fix it.

My point though, you seem to miss. Ghettos? Slums? Economic inequality? Once again, WE KNOW BETTER.

Economic poverty, on a global scale, has been plummeting. Slums, Ghettos, and so on, are issues still here, but far less in scale to what was going on in society only fifty to a hundred years ago. Economic inequality is getting more severe in the modern day, but we are seeing that happen due to many factors, and that will almost certainly not last forever, even then, we are better off today, even for those who aren't the one percent, than we were yesterday.

The thing is, we don't just "let" these things happen. We literally don't know how to solve them, these are artifacts of our mistakes, they are problems we will solve. We don't "let" people go hungry, we had a system, the first system that allowed so much technology to be so rapidly made, to allow so much growth in wealth, and didn't know how to adjust that system to ensure the poor don't go hungry as well.

And we know better. Nature doesn't.

Mankind builds on what exists, improves, creates, we move from a society of tribes at war, treating each other as inhuman, enslaving, killing, and so on, to societies where such things are the most horrible things you could imagine.

Yes, there are issues, and yes, the above things still happen. However, it is likely because those things had to happen. Consider slavery, which would have been only an option vs death when a tribe, with no social constructs ready to do things like colonize, form empires, and so on, deals with the defeat of another. Rather than just killing the other tribe, as many animals would do, human beings realized "it's silly to waste so much life, we put them to work".

Racism, sexism, all of those things are artifacts of times past, of activities, sometimes unrelated to the consequences we see today, which once truly did benefit, or appeared to benefit, humanity. Look at the bible, look at the rules they laid out, how wrong they are to a modern human being. That's what the people we came from believed. Around than two thousand years ago, they thought this was true, they did those things. And, for the times, they worked, they worked better than anything before them, and they were good for the time.

Now, was it the best? No, we look at that today and see the horrible treatment of peoples who could have been treated much better, of destroyed and lost lives, these things are absolutely horrible in every way. However, to expect these things not to happen is like to expect these old civilizations to figure out televison or run electrical wire. We haven't just evolved technically, our social abilities, our understanding, prisons, psychology, so much of our ability to treat each other has improved.

Even today, with inequality rising, we have learned the lessons of eras past when we set up our modern governments, one that serve the people, and we see people learning more and more every day about how to and not to treat capitalism, moving from societies that take all efficient measures, killing and hurting many due to lack of safety, to one that realizes that is wrong, and has fixed it.

Look at China. They aren't some evil group who mistreats their people, they are a nation rising from a state of agrarianism to a modern state, and we watch as they change every day, learning these new lessons themselves. China today looks scarily similar to the US/UK in the early 1900's, with modern tech thrown in, and accelerating at a much more rapid pace.

What we live on today is a thing built on years of trial and error, of efforts of thousands, constantly improving and building up society. The issues we face exist, yes, we aren't perfect, but we are a hell of a lot better than we would have been a few hundred years go, and we are "light years" ahead of what nature ever would have figured out in that same timeframe.

It's easy to think you have it all figured out when looking at it from the view of one person, in one place, but society deals with all people, all attitudes, in all places. We can't just throw out the racists, get rid of the beliefs that are negative, they have to evolve, society has to evolve, to learn, and every human being alive is a living, breathing, part of that evolution.

It's about doing what is right.

And that definition changes depending on who you ask. From natures view, there is no such thing.

I'm saying that we should encourage ourselves to do better, and without the sacrifice of biodiversity, a resource that is beyond value.

I agree, but I see a world where biodiversity means farms planted with many crops who have had key genes mutated to ensure they are resistant to multiple diseases, not untouched forests.