You're viewing a single thread.
I've thought about this a lot, raccoons are 100% taking over after humans. They already dominate north america and almost conquered Germany. Once human control runs out Europe is fucked and they will eventually take over all of Eurasia.
Oh please, if anyone it’s the dinosaurs coming back for round 2.
Birds are everywhere, many birds are fucking smart and already using tools and doing maths, all they need is seed, they have prior experience. End of story, dinosaurs are back.
Wouldn't it be like round 4 for dinosaurs?
It goes without saying that the Emus will retake Australia.
Since they're flightless, the rest of the world will be safe for a while. But when they form a navy or invent air travel, the rest of the world better watch out!
Edit: LOL, I just noticed your instance. You know what I'm talking about. 😛
Emus believe they own the country now.
They can cute their way into your house too
My friend has recurring raccoons she feeds. Their little hands are so adorable. There’s a possum that pretends to be a raccoon. She humours him.
Didn't Japan also import raccoons because of a TV show and they went fucking up ancient architecture
I think it’ll be crows
Really depends on how far the climate spirals out of control. The long term issue is positive feedback loops - when the results of a system produce the conditions that aggravate that same system. So like, arctic permafrost melts and releases methane; methane acts as a greenhouse gas and accelerates global warming; warming makes arctic thaw faster; methane released at higher rate; planet warms faster, more melt, more methane, more heat, and so on.
These kinds of things are already unleashed, so even if humans all went extinct RIGHT NOW and industry and such all came to a 100% full stop... the climate would still continue to destabalize on its own.
So... when we reach a point that spells the end for humans, we'll be crossing the threshold for other mammals too... I don't see racoons or baboons surviving.
Eventually, something will interrupt the feedback loop - i.e., the permafrost thaws completely and there's no more methane to release; but factor in all feedback loops and who knows how much heat we're talking - it could literally end with the Earth becoming molten.
My money's on bugs. They'll be a ble to survive conditions that animals can't. And if bugs get wiped out too, there's potential stemming from things like tardigrades or other microbes.
Or... we pump so much heat into our planet that even the most extreme of those die off too, leaving earth as just another completely lifeless rock floating through space.
Life, uh, finds a way. Until it doesn't.
The fear of feedback loops is reasonable, but may not be inevitable. The reason complex life exists on this planet, in part, is that the biosphere evolved to prevent runaway climate change. As the life forms grew more varied and complex, the tools for maintaining a viable atmosphere also increased. So the Precambrian extinctions are attributed to changes that extremely primitive life forms couldn't adapt to. Once life moved onto land, and trees, grasses, and flowers evolved, the number of ways for life to adapt went way up.
It should say something that the most recent mass extinction event (I mean, before the anthropocene), was caused by a giant asteroid and a decade(s?)-long winter, rather than a change in solar luminosity or runaway GHG shift.
With the advent of humans, this planet now has tools available for GHG and solar radiation management (SRM) that were unthinkable by nature. SRM with sulfur dioxide and air capture of CO₂ allow for the rapid reshaping of the climate almost as fast as fossil fuel combustion. As a result, the tools to stabilize the climate are available and their use is inevitable. The longer we wait to use them, the worse the problem gets and the more people are harmed, but given the unheard-of capacities that we've developed to stave off runaway global warming, I do not believe that humanity will choose extinction over GHG management and SRM.
Most of these thoughts come from Gaian Bottleneck Theory, which you can read more about here. You may be right, but I'm hoping you are wrong (no offense).
the tools to stabilize the climate are available and their use is inevitable.
That's where we disagree. We've known for decades what kinds of things we should be doing to mitigate climate damage. We choose not to, cuz as a species we're greedy, evil, and fucking stupid. We'll put it off 'till tomorrow to live a more comfortable today until it's too late. We might whip out the fire extinguisher some day, but we'll be spraying it at ashes.
I'm hoping you are wrong (no offense).
I'm hoping I'm wrong too. ...but to say I have no faith in humanity would be beating a dusty crater that used to be the site of a dead horse. I really don't think we have it in us to actually make the changes that need to be happening NOW.
I just hope we don't fuck the planet so hard that it stops some other critter from rising from the ashes to become a dominant species that isn't a dickhead like us.
While my government threw money at coal generators and lied about wind and solar, wind and solar adoption skyrocketed and coal plants became bad investments. Even when governments don't help, even when government is opposed people take action. And governments will change, especially with the effects of more energy driving bigger weather
No one has deployed an effective green house gas (GHG) direct air capture system yet, but there are plans that are likely to work and we will beat GHG by the end of this century for sure - there are so many people dedicated to making sure that happens and only a handful of enormous companies opposing, and even they are diversifying their holdings away from fossil fuels