When everything disappears there isn't going to be anything left to adapt. Is a habitat composed of one single plant species, now prone to severe burning, with half a dozen animal species really an "adaptation", compared to the dozens of plants and dozens of animals that should be there?
And in the case of Florida and the Burmese pythons... if the pythons end up eating enough mammals, there won't be any mammals left to adapt. Part of it is habitat loss, part of it is introduced predators.
One of the species I monitor for the company I work for is an endangered song bird. It is threatened by habitat loss, as well as nest parasitism by an invasive bird species. When my company first started working with these two species, there were about a dozen pairs of the endangered species. After at least a decade of control on the invasive species (because complete eradication isn't possible), along with removal of invasive plants that degrades its habitat, and that endangered bird now numbers greater than 1600 pairs and there's talk of downgrading it from endangered to threatened.