Is that correct? I have been arguing with someone in my class for weeks and he is so stubborn. He can't agree that we can't survive without trees. He says that in about five thousand years there will be no trees no matter what because we'll apparently run out of room and we'll need to cut down forests. Won't food be a problem before there's so few space, that we'll need to cut down every tree? Won't we just die because there's no oxygen, rain can't produce properly, soil will erode, the air will be filthy and the earth won't be livable. He always says the same excuse and he says that there's technology that turns carbon dioxide into oxygen. Sure there is something like that, but why would we need to make it if we have trees anyway? And wouldn't there be not enough space for the amount of that technology that it would take to provide all of humanity with that amount of oxygen if there wasn't enough space for any trees to be left? And why would we just cut down every tree when there's national parks and world heritage forests as well as conservation areas and people who own forested land which they chose to keep? Who is right and what will probably really happen?