That is not reflected in reality. Predator-prey cycles often go through periods of over-hunting of prey, followed by mass starvation of predators. In some instances, this is a cyclical pattern that regularly repeats. In extreme cases, this can result in extinction of both species.

Only humans are the players for extreme cases.

That is an incredibly naive assertion. Humans certainly are a cause of many disruptions and have produce many of the more dramatic examples in recorded history, but there are plenty of natural causes that produce the same and similar effects. It is certainly erroneous to attribute all such results to humans, especially since plenty of them predate the existence of humans.

Regardless, your original claim that there is no overkill or overpopulation still stands refuted by several of the common cycles in population dynamics.

'Fairy rings' often result in dead zones in which the fungi have essentially strip mined available nutrients as the ring expands. There are several plants whose survival strategies involve poisoning their surroundings to dissuade competition. I already gave you the example of algal bloom. As for sound pollution, the Coqui frog can reach 100 dB. And this is without getting into the plethora of variation on parasitism, cycles which usually have no benefit for the unwilling host.

No pollution(be it water, air, land, light, sound) No using of natural resources, using irreplaceable items.

Like I said, it's natural, it's their way of survival.

That a rather convenient definition for you

When non-human animals pillage their surroundings, its natural and not pollution.

When humans do the same thing, it somehow becomes non-natural and pollution.

As I noted in the other comment chain, this amounts to little more than a question begging definition.

Humans are certainty unique in the degree of severity of our ability to affect the world, but problems resulting from a species aggressively exploiting a new ecological niche after expanding beyond its original environment are hardly unique to humans.

Exactly, and that's one of the many reasons humans are not animals, humans are different.

Seriously, did you somehow miss the second half of that sentence?

Humans are not that different when it comes to exploitation. Our intelligence gives us more potent tools to effect our will, but the patterns our behavior follow towards the environment are mirrors of other patterns common in nature. The pattern of destruction we cause is rather typical of an invasive species. We just take it further.

and just like what you said, and what the Bible stated, humans are different from animals, humans are unique, humans never came from animals

I said unique in degree, not in kind.

Regardless, a unique trait need not imply a different origin when there exists a mechanism for that trait to arise from something that did not possess it.

or from any other form of lower life.

Evolution does not recognize any sort of higher or 'lower' life. There are similarities and differences, but no inherent ordering.