I agree with everything you said. Is it a huge flaw? Yes. The earth was technically doing fine before humans came in with their need for more.

I think the hardest part here is finding the BALANCE between making the world objectively a better place, and making the world a better place for humans.

This will probably sound crazy but thing about this. Because we as humans are capable of having emotions and feel the need to be "happy with life" (which could very well be a flawed way of living, objectively) we're kinda stuck with having to acknowledge that part with every decision we make for the earth. It's just a fact of nature that we have to take into account. If we don't, we're ignoring a factor of a living thing. It's like not acknowledging the fact that some birds can fly (odd comparison lol).

If we took away all emotional decisions and made the world an "objectively better place," it would probably be a terrible place for humans to live. We'd basically be living like animals and there would be suffering and unfairness everywhere. If you're being honest with yourself, would you want to live like that all the sudden? If you had been born into that world, you'd think it's normal since that's the only life you know, but attempting to suddenly change the world for everyone would create chaos and rebellion.

Are emotions objectively wrong? Not sure. Some animals can exhibit emotion-like qualities, so maybe it's actually an objective part of the earth...then again, we might just be a victim of anthropomorphism.

Side note: I also believe that's why the president has such a hard job and people should give him some slack. The president has to please every single person in the country (impossible) while still doing the right thing for the earth overall.