FWIW, the Earth has about 500-600My left before common photosynthesis is no longer possible, due to consequences of Sol (our sun) relentlessly heating up, gradually.

Now personally, my understanding is that unless complex life somehow adapts, then that will be the end of such upon Earth, with simpler life presumably surviving for billions more years past that mark.

Point is-- if complex life can survive the coming collapse, then it evidently does have a very nice, healthy window to work with. Personally, I suppose that might be helped out quite a bit by the ‘churning of the continents,’ in which landmass gets regularly cycled back in to the magma layer over the course of millions of years, with new areas appearing on the other edges, so to speak.

EDIT: clarifications

But billionaires need bigger yachts. And more mansions. What’re we to do? Can’t sacrifice the billionaires ultra-mega-yachts.

I hate you (but I also love you)

I’m enjoying the thought of our current planet being melted down into liquid hot magma and a whole new planet surface getting a chance

They already did, and current policy is to ignore it

Dark colored yachts

What about life around deep sea vents?

Right??

It’s going to be glorious.
–(sotto voce)

That’s actually not clear at all. How did you draw this conclusion from what’s written here? It cites decreased pollution across the northern hemisphere as one of the drivers of this, for example, and how is that horrifying?

Well, they are certainly profiting from the despair.

Ahh, good point, yes.
I actually was thinking about those beautiful little deep-sea worlds when I wrote the above, but simply didn’t know enough to assert a dang-ol’ thing at the time. Okay, let’s see:

However, although it is often said that these communities exist independently of the sun, some of the organisms are actually dependent upon oxygen produced by photosynthetic organisms, while others are anaerobic. –WP

So… looks like we have at least *some* members of these little communities carrying on, past the death of oxygenic photosynthesis, which they evidently don’t need in order to survive. (meanwhile with anoxygenic photosynthesis carrying on for many millions more of years).

But off the top of my empty coconut, it does raise a couple Q’s:

1. Since there are maybe a dozen or less community members who live in these little worlds, closely built in to a commensurate ecosystem, would the death of the ones who rely on traditional photosynthesis bring about a collapse, either partial or total?

2. Would rampant global warming tend to mess with the already super-heated, typically sulfurous nature of these worlds? (me, I would tend to think “nawt,” since they’re already so hot, but then again, I’m just some layperson really curious about all this, hah)

Ah… those beautiful, entrancing little forbidden worlds:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ECBbAjoEHWI

️

This is how it started on Venus too!

at this point I’m fully expecting the only thing that keeps us from extincting ourselves with global warming is almost extincting ourselves with nuclear winter.

See we got this! We’re just going to get rid of mice climate change with a snake nuclear winter!

They’ll just cancel each other out perfectly

I don’t wish for this to happen, mind you, but we are clearly living in the dumbest possible timeline, and so it is the only solution that makes sense

With how bad its going a summer without winter might give us another 10 years.

Because absorbed light is excess energy.

Also due to reduced water vapor and ice cover lol. It’s a conclusion that can be drawn without much reliance on the article, which focuses a lot on specific climate model improvements and not the obvious concern: given our desire for the earth to reflect more of the sun’s rays and cool off, reflecting fewer and warming up is not good