I actually fact checked this and it’s true.

  • sosodev@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Even if humans manage to kill off most life on Earth it will continue to exist, propagate, and become more complex. Again we’re talking about billions of years. There have been huge shifts in climate and mass extinctions many times before and yet here we are.

    • samus12345@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      True, it would be difficult to completely turn Earth into a lifeless rock, but I think humans are up to the task.

      • HenryWong327
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Eh I doubt it. Every single nuke ever built combined still doesn’t come close to the power of the Chicxulub asteroid (the one that killed the dinosaurs) and even that impact didn’t come close to eliminating all life on Earth. Unless someone accidentally compresses a mountain into an artifical black hole or something there probably is no way to wipe out all life on Earth.

        • Tvkan@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          Mars was once habitable but lost it’s magnetic field, wiping it’s atmosphere. Venus was once habitable but taken over by a runaway greenhouse effect.

          I’m not saying they ever had life or that we’re going to suffer the same fate, but it’s definitely possible to wipe a planet clean.

          • HenryWong327
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            75% of all species, not all life. Larger species and photosynthesizers were more heavily affected, while smaller species, scavengers, and deep sea life were less affected.

            And I’m not a biologist, but I’m pretty sure even 75% of all life, not species, still wouldn’t be close to completely ending life on Earth, cause in the end as long as some microbes survived around a hydrothermal vent somewhere total extinction would be avoided.

            • rojun@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              I still think that “lifeless rock” does not specify how lifeless - theoretically extinct or just lifeless enough to make human life either extinct or just miserable. I took it as the latter, and in that case even lesser cases than 75% of all species would suffice.

              The first case, the theoretical and non-human focused pov is quite another thing. Like you said, there’s so many opportunities and adaptations for life to seap through the combs of doom :)

              • HenryWong327
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                Going a couple comments up the chain:

                Even if humans manage to kill off most life on Earth it will continue to exist, propagate, and become more complex. Again we’re talking about billions of years. There have been huge shifts in climate and mass extinctions many times before and yet here we are.

                So I took it to mean all life on Earth being dead. As long as one microbe survives to reproduce and start evolving it doesn’t count.

    • PorkRollWobbly
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah I think most people don’t know or comprehend that there have already been like 5 mass extinctions in our planets lifespan. It’s going to take something like getting hit by 4 gamma ray bursts at the same time to completely wipe life off of planet earth.

      • 1847953620@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        true, we’re just gonna be like a soft reset button, like a windows reinstall without formatting, where it just shoves everything into windows.old