Most certainly too many people are a luxury which planet Earth can't afford.If we combine too many with too much consumption then the result is disaster on the Malthusian level.

Do a significant and game changing portion of Homo saps have enough nous to realize this and force effective action before it is too late?
I'm not optimistic but reluctant to give up hope entirely.

Read Clive Hamilton's latest book,"Requiem For A Species" to get a realistic handle on where we are now.

Unless we change our mindset there will be indeed a requiem but most of us won't be around to hear it.

Why are so many environmentalists so hateful of their own species? It seems to be they have a gross misunderstanding of the world combined with a kind of arrogance which is particularly disturbing.

While Nature can be beautiful its also violent, exploitative and the ultimate expression of the weak being dominated by the strong. Animals kill each other, not just for food but sometimes for fun and practice. There is little benevolence in the animal world. Left to its own devices, life on Earth is vicious and uncompromising. The idyllic pre or post human world does not exist. All animals exploit the environment and will dominate resources if they can. Many also produce chemicals which are destructive of other species.

This anti-human rhetoric is becoming worrying. Some of our fellow humans seek our own extinction. Surely that's a first in the animal world?

P.S. I notice that while they regard the human race as destructive,environmental extremists believe THEY should keep living, because THEY are special even though they are as much part of the consumer society they hate as anyone else.

Atman
How is population sustainability anti-human? We are not separate from the environment but part of it and the environment's demise is our demise.

Nature is violent and many times unpredictable tumultuous but what has that got to do with the subject of populations?

We depend on natural resources as a species and to survive we need to protect that which sustains us.

If human populations continue to grow more forests will be cut down losing critical carbons sinks, mineral resources will eventually diminsh, water in some countries is scarce. You will need to farm more food on scarce arable land which is continually being taken up by urban expansion.

You cannot keep damming rivers and interfering with water cycles just to cope with continually expanding populations. Look at the damage to the Murray Darling.

It is indeed anti-human to continue to grow populations and to continue the cult of consumerism and greed which is what is feeding this push by governments and corporates for a Big Australia.

What utter twaddle, with due respect, of course.

Christine you might do better trying to get our national parks to be something other than a refuge for ferrals, [flora & fauna], so we can trample on them in comfort.

The blue planet doesn't give a damn wether it is a wet blue thing, or a white snowball, the latter most probably it's ultimate fate, if not swallowed by a supernova.

I wonder if that alge pontificated on the effect it was having on it's environment, or just got on with it's job, of preparing the place for oxygen breathers.

Did those dinosaurs worry about it, or just keep on bulldozing trees to make way for our cattle.

No they didn't.

So come on Christene, get on with your job.

We are here to consolidate diverse resources into the material stockpiles we call cities. These cities are to facilitate the development of cockroach intelligence, until, with our demise, they can generate a great civilisation, utilising these gathered resources.

Do you really think it is by accident that the cockroach has the greatest resistance to nuclear radiation of all the creatures on earth?

No of course not, & lady, you are not pulling your weight. Get to it.

the problem is patriarchy not humanity.
human communities have lived sustainably for tens of thousands of years with decision-making conducted
by agreement between women's and men's councils and committees.
unsustainable habitation arose with the male domination of decision-making.
the solution is to transform the patriarchies of the modern world with equal rights governance.
Australia is poised at the vanguard of this transformation with a referendum enabling an equal
rights republic with a parliament enacting law by agreement between a women's legislature and
a men's legislature a certainty to receive overwhelming support.

Environmentalists are so sickeningly morally rightous and yes they are anti-human at times. There are serious issues to deal with regarding the environment but ... "the luxury of people"? Just nonsense.