What type of god is more likely? One that wants to save only humans? Or one that wants to save all other animals as well?
No god at all is likely in the very least. Nature creates the physics that allow for various forms of life to evolve but no aspect of it has any concern for the fate of any inhabitant of the universe.
If salvation was a real thing (which it most certainly is not!) humans would be far LESS deserving than other species, because of the damage we've done to the planet. Pretending that the human species is "special" is part of religion's sales pitch. To claim that only humans have this fictitious thing called a "soul" helps the fiction that we're special and will live forever while "lesser" creatures won't. (So THERE!! We're better than everyone else!" ) It's much like the gop philosophy that rich people are special and better than everyone else. It pads the ego and sells the bullsh*t.
The only likely god in my eyes is a simply apathetic one. It simply created the universe and left it to its own devices, maybe even poking and prodding from time to time. A caring and loving god has never been shown a sliver of existing with how reality and history has played out. We take better care of our own pets than a divine being would of its own creations, and that is all the more reason to doubt the very existence of it.
@Obnoxious I have always held that if a god truly did exist, it probably would not be anything that humanitynhas ever fathomed. Or I certainly hope its not one of our own man made creations, else that would be a sad reality to live in.
A cruel and uncaring god is just as likely as a kind and loving god--and neither is likely. If there should be an infinite creator being (and there is no proof of one, nor need for one) it would not/could not be bound by, inhibited by, motivated by, human motions.