> half of the earth's habitable land is currently being used for agriculture This is a fact (to some margin of error). It's indisputable that humans require l

> half of the earth's habitable land is currently being used for agriculture This is a fact (to some margin of error). It's indisputable that humans require land to produce food through agriculture, and that amount of required land increases with population size. I'm curious what analysis could possibly show human population growth doesn't result in more wildlife habitat destruction. Since we stopped being hunter-gatherers, we've required agriculture to support large sedentary populations. Land use by humans/wildlife is generally a zero-sum game.