I'm on the side of the environmentalists on this one, and here's why.
exhibit A: google earth. Zoom in anywhere on main land and it's either cultivated farm land, cities or roads. Unless you're actively looking for it, you're not going to find much land that hasn't been altered by humans.
exhibit B: breathing is not as fun as it used to be, at least if you're in Paris, LA, or Delhi.

I'm not going to look at any scientific data and pretend to understand it. I look at global warming predictions like a weather report. There's a chance of mass extinction based on horrific environmental events, and a chance of just partly cloudy. However one part of the forecast is alarming enough that I'd suggest we cut some of the shit that might increase the chance of the unfavorable outcome. What I don't agree with is the order of importance when it comes to the actions we take to combat this. I'm baffled that when we look at the global population growth nobody in the western world is even suggesting that everyone stop putting it in the front hole so much. If we cut the global population in half by the next 100 years, we pretty much solved all the problems and we didn't even need electric Jesus Elon Musk to help us out here.