this article discusses the television show as if it is a credible, scientific source. this is not good. the future is wild is considered by the majority of modern speculative biologists to be very scientifically inaccurate, and thus i believe the show should be discussed as a work of creative fiction, rather than science fiction.
i urge you to read this article, which tells why an animal such as the magasquid and squibbon could not exist. there are many other inaccuracies in the future is wild, but i fear i do not have the time to point them all out.
why there is no walking with tentacles: part 1: http://planetfuraha.blogspot.com/2008/09/why-there-is-no-walking-with-tentacles.html part 2: http://planetfuraha.blogspot.com/2008/11/why-there-is-no-walking-with-tentacles.html part 3: http://planetfuraha.blogspot.com/2008/11/why-there-is-no-walking-with-tentacles_30.html part 4: http://planetfuraha.blogspot.com/2008/12/why-there-is-no-walking-with-tentacles.html
I'll have a look at this when I have time, meanwhile you are free to edit the article and explain your difficulties. Proxima Centauri 13:08, November 18, 2009 (UTC)
Are we sure that everyone of these requires an article of its own? Most of those are quite short, perhaps we could write just an article for each biome and put there the species' description. - 126.96.36.199 15:44, February 23, 2013 (UTC)