At this point I've basically given up hope and come to the grudging admission that ecosystem destruction through predatory exploitation is probably the Hard Filter behind the Fermi paradox.
Any species evolving in an environment defined by the competition for resources and hitting the same - or similar - exploits in the game engine as humanity (tool use and cooperation), seems destined to be the victim of its own success.
The primary behavioral mechanisms that would prepare a species for such an unlikely success - e.g. "don't consume more resources than strictly required" - would never make it through the selection process.
So we end up with the power of gods and the appetites of locusts.
I agree.. Except that, our exploits are so good now that we are not going to be victims of anything. Humans will adapt and continue to expand, we are absolutely not in danger I think.
As for wiping out any other living ecosystem that is not directly in symbiosis with our food production chain, that’s a completely different story, and very likely.
There's a very significant feedback system at play here that will eventually result in a mass die off of humans, and a near halt of the human produced greenhouse gas emissions. Around that time, the regions near the poles will be as green as ever.
I don't think it's possible for the humans to completely destroy the ecosystem. It would require a runaway event that would have to make nearly 100% of the world inhospitable, probably requiring a bit of war mixed in.
If you're talking "we" as you and me, then I agree. If it's "we" as humans, it's a hard disagree. I don't think the science is there.
I think we're looking at a future with far less humans, but not one without humans. The poles will warm and become comfortable, the oceans will warm and bring humidity, bringing the tropics north, as they once were.
Life, and humans, will carry on with their never ending struggle.
I think the only end to humans could be political, but even then, humans would be just fine, even with a nuclear war. Nobody will be nuking the Papuans who live in the forests of Papua New Guinea or the random farmer who lives out in the middle of nowhere in the midwest.
I also think we're doomed, but I still go to my job and act normalish.
It's surreal. It's a topic that just isn't brought up in polite company, which reminds me of that 'Don't Look Up' movie.
I don't think we're doomed as people seem to think. Things will change and we will react accordingly. Life might get worse but it will be hard for it be any worse than it has been for the majority of human existence.
Any species evolving in an environment defined by the competition for resources and hitting the same - or similar - exploits in the game engine as humanity (tool use and cooperation), seems destined to be the victim of its own success.
The primary behavioral mechanisms that would prepare a species for such an unlikely success - e.g. "don't consume more resources than strictly required" - would never make it through the selection process.
So we end up with the power of gods and the appetites of locusts.