If one changes the title from "Economic Growth Is Incompatible with Biodiversity Conservation" to "Continual Growth Is Incompatible with Biodiversity Conservati

If one changes the title from "Economic Growth Is Incompatible with Biodiversity Conservation" to "Continual Growth Is Incompatible with Biodiversity Conservation" you get a much more interesting statement, to my mind. You can either decide that the planet can support an infinite number of human beings or a finite number. I cannot have reasonable discussions with the former camp, so when it comes to the latter, it's all about that finite number as a function of lifestyle, healthcare, relative comfort, and so on. This many millions of people if we all live like Americans; that many billions of people if we are all miserable and flea-bitten. Bringing the economy in it is at best a distraction, at worst it simply invites discussion from people who think their pet -ism economic theory will make the underlying problem go away.