https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/humans-contribute...:

“Humans are responsible for some of the wobble in Earth's spin.

Since 1899, the Earth's axis of spin has shifted about 34 feet (10.5 meters). Now, research quantifies the reasons why and finds that a third is due to melting ice and rising sea levels, particularly in Greenland—placing the blame on the doorstep of anthropogenic climate change.”

Pretty sure animals and people are made of stuff that is already on planet earth.

Earth mass: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth_mass :

An Earth mass (denoted as M_E or M⊕ ( M_{\oplus } ), where 🜨 is the standard astronomical symbol for Earth), is a unit of mass equal to the mass of the planet Earth. The current best estimate for the mass of Earth is M🜨 = 5.9722×10^24 kg, with a relative uncertainty of 10^−4. It is equivalent to an average density of 5515 kg/m3.

Average mass of a human: 50-75kg, depending on whether it's babies or not

Population of Earth: 8.1x10e9

Total mass of humans: ~ 400-600 x 10e9

Proportion of Earth's mass composed of live humans: 500e9 / 5.9e24 = 8.4e-14 = 0.00000000000084 %

According to the video series on "How the pyramids were built" at https://thepump.org/ by The Pharaoh's Pump Society, the later pyramids had a pool of water at the topmost layer of construction such that they could place and set water-tight blocks of carved stone using a crane barge that everybody walked to the side of to lift.

The earth loses about 100,000 tons/year via hydrogen and helium escaping. The earth gains about 50,000 tons per year via space dust, etc.

Since temperature = energy, e=mc^2, therefore temperature = mass, the earth gains 160 tons/year due to global warming.

So Earth's mass and gravity is therefore decreasing over time. If you assume global warming is directly proportional to population, we'll need ~2.5 trillion people before we can start increasing gravity.

No. Lifeforms are merely the re-arrangement of molecules which are already present. And it would be a negligible amount of matter compared to the mass of the Earth anyway, even if it was magically-introduced matter.

A few comments here say humans are reconstituted preexisting matter. But aren't there added inputs from sunlight and photosynthesis over millions of years?

There's probably not a net gain, as a system, because we're also radiating heat out, burning fossil fuels, etc., but the earth isn't a closed system, is it?

If not for the constant influx of sunlight, we'd have to rely on core heat (tube worms and chemoautotrophy) to fuel metabolism, which most species don't do. It's photosynthesis of algae, plants, and cyanobacteria and subsequent predation that allows most life, including us, to flourish, no? And that requires a constant external input of sunlight?