Toby Tyrrell
- Published in print:
- 2013
- Published Online:
- October 2017
- ISBN:
- 9780691121581
- eISBN:
- 9781400847914
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Princeton University Press
- DOI:
- 10.23943/princeton/9780691121581.003.0001
- Subject:
- Environmental Science, Environmental Studies
This introductory chapter discusses the Gaia hypothesis as well as two other competing hypotheses. Gaia, the idea that life moderates the global environment to make it more favorable for life, was ...
More
This introductory chapter discusses the Gaia hypothesis as well as two other competing hypotheses. Gaia, the idea that life moderates the global environment to make it more favorable for life, was first introduced in 1972 in an academic paper by James Lovelock titled “Gaia as Seen through the Atmosphere.” The Gaia hypothesis proposes planetary regulation by and for the biota, where the “biota” is the collection of all life. Lovelock suggests that life has had a hand on the tiller of environmental control, and the intervention of life in the regulation of the planet has been such as to promote stability and keep conditions comfortable. The chapter then looks at the geological hypothesis, which suggests that the nature of the Earth's environment is principally determined by a mixture of geological forces and astronomical processes, and the coevolutionary hypothesis, which asserts that life has had an enormous impact on the planetary environment.Less
This introductory chapter discusses the Gaia hypothesis as well as two other competing hypotheses. Gaia, the idea that life moderates the global environment to make it more favorable for life, was first introduced in 1972 in an academic paper by James Lovelock titled “Gaia as Seen through the Atmosphere.” The Gaia hypothesis proposes planetary regulation by and for the biota, where the “biota” is the collection of all life. Lovelock suggests that life has had a hand on the tiller of environmental control, and the intervention of life in the regulation of the planet has been such as to promote stability and keep conditions comfortable. The chapter then looks at the geological hypothesis, which suggests that the nature of the Earth's environment is principally determined by a mixture of geological forces and astronomical processes, and the coevolutionary hypothesis, which asserts that life has had an enormous impact on the planetary environment.
Sébastien Dutreuil
- Published in print:
- 2018
- Published Online:
- January 2019
- ISBN:
- 9780226569871
- eISBN:
- 9780226570075
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- University of Chicago Press
- DOI:
- 10.7208/chicago/9780226570075.003.0018
- Subject:
- History, History of Science, Technology, and Medicine
After a career as a chemist and engineer, James Lovelock proposed the Gaia hypothesis in the 1970s with Lynn Margulis, a biologist. The hypothesis highlights the important influence that living ...
More
After a career as a chemist and engineer, James Lovelock proposed the Gaia hypothesis in the 1970s with Lynn Margulis, a biologist. The hypothesis highlights the important influence that living beings have on their geological environment to speculate about the possibility of a regulation of the planetary environment. From the beginning Lovelock saw Gaia as a grand idea, challenging the way biology and geology should be carried out, up to our very conception of nature. This chapter recalls the rich context in which the hypothesis was elaborated in the 1960s and 1970s. It then traces Gaia’s contrasted reception. Whereas evolutionary biologists ridiculed it as a pseudo-metaphor comparing the earth with an organism, Gaia has generated new research programs in the earth sciences and has been embraced by the environmental counterculture as a new conception of nature and of our relationships with the earth.Less
After a career as a chemist and engineer, James Lovelock proposed the Gaia hypothesis in the 1970s with Lynn Margulis, a biologist. The hypothesis highlights the important influence that living beings have on their geological environment to speculate about the possibility of a regulation of the planetary environment. From the beginning Lovelock saw Gaia as a grand idea, challenging the way biology and geology should be carried out, up to our very conception of nature. This chapter recalls the rich context in which the hypothesis was elaborated in the 1960s and 1970s. It then traces Gaia’s contrasted reception. Whereas evolutionary biologists ridiculed it as a pseudo-metaphor comparing the earth with an organism, Gaia has generated new research programs in the earth sciences and has been embraced by the environmental counterculture as a new conception of nature and of our relationships with the earth.
Toby Tyrrell
- Published in print:
- 2013
- Published Online:
- October 2017
- ISBN:
- 9780691121581
- eISBN:
- 9781400847914
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Princeton University Press
- DOI:
- 10.23943/princeton/9780691121581.001.0001
- Subject:
- Environmental Science, Environmental Studies
One of the enduring questions about our planet is how it has remained continuously habitable over vast stretches of geological time despite the fact that its atmosphere and climate are potentially ...
More
One of the enduring questions about our planet is how it has remained continuously habitable over vast stretches of geological time despite the fact that its atmosphere and climate are potentially unstable. James Lovelock's Gaia hypothesis posits that life itself has intervened in the regulation of the planetary environment in order to keep it stable and favorable for life. First proposed in the 1970s, Lovelock's hypothesis remains highly controversial and continues to provoke fierce debate. This book undertakes the first in-depth investigation of the arguments put forward by Lovelock and others—and concludes that the evidence doesn't stack up in support of Gaia. The book draws on the latest findings in fields as diverse as climate science, oceanography, atmospheric science, geology, ecology, and evolutionary biology. The book takes readers to obscure corners of the natural world, from southern Africa where ancient rocks reveal that icebergs were once present near the equator, to mimics of cleaner fish on Indonesian reefs, to blind fish deep in Mexican caves. It weaves these and many other intriguing observations into a comprehensive analysis of the major assertions and lines of argument underpinning Gaia, and finds that it is not a credible picture of how life and Earth interact. The book reflects on the scientific evidence indicating that life and environment mutually affect each other, and proposes that feedbacks on Earth do not provide robust protection against the environment becoming uninhabitable—or against poor stewardship by us.Less
One of the enduring questions about our planet is how it has remained continuously habitable over vast stretches of geological time despite the fact that its atmosphere and climate are potentially unstable. James Lovelock's Gaia hypothesis posits that life itself has intervened in the regulation of the planetary environment in order to keep it stable and favorable for life. First proposed in the 1970s, Lovelock's hypothesis remains highly controversial and continues to provoke fierce debate. This book undertakes the first in-depth investigation of the arguments put forward by Lovelock and others—and concludes that the evidence doesn't stack up in support of Gaia. The book draws on the latest findings in fields as diverse as climate science, oceanography, atmospheric science, geology, ecology, and evolutionary biology. The book takes readers to obscure corners of the natural world, from southern Africa where ancient rocks reveal that icebergs were once present near the equator, to mimics of cleaner fish on Indonesian reefs, to blind fish deep in Mexican caves. It weaves these and many other intriguing observations into a comprehensive analysis of the major assertions and lines of argument underpinning Gaia, and finds that it is not a credible picture of how life and Earth interact. The book reflects on the scientific evidence indicating that life and environment mutually affect each other, and proposes that feedbacks on Earth do not provide robust protection against the environment becoming uninhabitable—or against poor stewardship by us.
Mark I. Wallace
- Published in print:
- 2018
- Published Online:
- May 2019
- ISBN:
- 9780823281329
- eISBN:
- 9780823284955
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Fordham University Press
- DOI:
- 10.5422/fordham/9780823281329.003.0006
- Subject:
- Religion, Theology
Using James Lovelock’s Gaia theory and biblical exegesis, chapter 5 maintains that Earth is a sentient organism with its own moods, relational capacities, and vulnerability to suffering. This “living ...
More
Using James Lovelock’s Gaia theory and biblical exegesis, chapter 5 maintains that Earth is a sentient organism with its own moods, relational capacities, and vulnerability to suffering. This “living Earth” theme is further explored in case studies of two sacred land-sites in Northern Spain visited by the author: The Cape of the Crosses natural park, and the El Camino de Santiago pilgrimage route. Both sites are heralded as “thin places”—landscapes where divinity and materiality comfortably intersect—in which errant wandering and purposeful travel are valued equally. Currently, such sites are cruciform: as Jesus was sacrificed at Calvary, so today we crucify afresh God’s winged Spirit in nature through toxic impacts against plants, animals, and human beings. The scars of Golgotha mark the whole Earth. The chapter concludes with hope symbolized by the feral pigeon—the dovey cousin of Jesus’ baptismal bird—amidst the contemporary loss of embodied deity through ecocidal, even deicidal, practices.Less
Using James Lovelock’s Gaia theory and biblical exegesis, chapter 5 maintains that Earth is a sentient organism with its own moods, relational capacities, and vulnerability to suffering. This “living Earth” theme is further explored in case studies of two sacred land-sites in Northern Spain visited by the author: The Cape of the Crosses natural park, and the El Camino de Santiago pilgrimage route. Both sites are heralded as “thin places”—landscapes where divinity and materiality comfortably intersect—in which errant wandering and purposeful travel are valued equally. Currently, such sites are cruciform: as Jesus was sacrificed at Calvary, so today we crucify afresh God’s winged Spirit in nature through toxic impacts against plants, animals, and human beings. The scars of Golgotha mark the whole Earth. The chapter concludes with hope symbolized by the feral pigeon—the dovey cousin of Jesus’ baptismal bird—amidst the contemporary loss of embodied deity through ecocidal, even deicidal, practices.
Stephen H. Schneider, James R. Miller, Eileen Crist, and Penelope J. Boston (eds)
- Published in print:
- 2004
- Published Online:
- August 2013
- ISBN:
- 9780262194983
- eISBN:
- 9780262283182
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- The MIT Press
- DOI:
- 10.7551/mitpress/9780262194983.001.0001
- Subject:
- Environmental Science, Climate
This is a multidisciplinary reexamination of the Gaia hypothesis, which was introduced by James Lovelock and Lynn Margulis in the early 1970s. The Gaia hypothesis holds that Earth’s physical and ...
More
This is a multidisciplinary reexamination of the Gaia hypothesis, which was introduced by James Lovelock and Lynn Margulis in the early 1970s. The Gaia hypothesis holds that Earth’s physical and biological processes are linked to form a complex, self-regulating system, and that life has affected this system over time. Until a few decades ago, most of the earth sciences viewed the planet through disciplinary lenses: biology, chemistry, geology, atmospheric, and ocean studies. The Gaia hypothesis, on the other hand, takes a very broad interdisciplinary approach. Its most controversial aspect suggests that life actively participates in shaping the physical and chemical environment on which it depends in a way that optimizes the conditions for life. Despite initial dismissal of the Gaian approach as New Age philosophy, it has today been incorporated into mainstream interdisciplinary scientific theory, as seen in its strong influence on the field of Earth System Science. This book provides a multi-faceted examination of Gaia as science and addresses significant criticism of, and changes in, the hypothesis since its introduction. Chapters explore the scientific, philosophical, and theoretical foundations of Gaia. They address such topics as the compatibility of natural selection and Gaian processes, Gaia and the “thermodynamics of life,” the role of computer models in Gaian science (from James Lovelock’s famous but controversial “Daisyworld” to more sophisticated models that use the techniques of artificial life), pre-Socratic precedents for the idea of a “Living Earth,” and the climate of the Amazon Basin as a Gaian system.Less
This is a multidisciplinary reexamination of the Gaia hypothesis, which was introduced by James Lovelock and Lynn Margulis in the early 1970s. The Gaia hypothesis holds that Earth’s physical and biological processes are linked to form a complex, self-regulating system, and that life has affected this system over time. Until a few decades ago, most of the earth sciences viewed the planet through disciplinary lenses: biology, chemistry, geology, atmospheric, and ocean studies. The Gaia hypothesis, on the other hand, takes a very broad interdisciplinary approach. Its most controversial aspect suggests that life actively participates in shaping the physical and chemical environment on which it depends in a way that optimizes the conditions for life. Despite initial dismissal of the Gaian approach as New Age philosophy, it has today been incorporated into mainstream interdisciplinary scientific theory, as seen in its strong influence on the field of Earth System Science. This book provides a multi-faceted examination of Gaia as science and addresses significant criticism of, and changes in, the hypothesis since its introduction. Chapters explore the scientific, philosophical, and theoretical foundations of Gaia. They address such topics as the compatibility of natural selection and Gaian processes, Gaia and the “thermodynamics of life,” the role of computer models in Gaian science (from James Lovelock’s famous but controversial “Daisyworld” to more sophisticated models that use the techniques of artificial life), pre-Socratic precedents for the idea of a “Living Earth,” and the climate of the Amazon Basin as a Gaian system.
Kristin Shrader-Frechette
- Published in print:
- 2011
- Published Online:
- January 2012
- ISBN:
- 9780199794638
- eISBN:
- 9780199919277
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199794638.003.0001
- Subject:
- Philosophy, Moral Philosophy
Chapter 1 begins by stressing the severity of climate change (CC) and showing how, contrary to popular belief, atomic energy is not a viable solution to ...
More
Chapter 1 begins by stressing the severity of climate change (CC) and showing how, contrary to popular belief, atomic energy is not a viable solution to CC. Many scientists and most market proponents agree that renewable energy and energy efficiencies are better options. The chapter also shows that government subsidies for oil and nuclear power are the result of flawed science, poor ethics, short-term thinking, and special-interest influence. The chapter has 7 sections, the first of which surveys four major components of the energy crisis. These are oil addiction, non-CC-related deaths from fossil-fuel pollution, nuclear-weapons proliferation, and catastrophic CC. The second section summarizes some of the powerful evidence for global CC. The third section uses historical, ahistorical, Rawlsian, and utilitarian ethical principles to show how developed nations, especially the US, are most responsible for human-caused CC. The fourth section shows why climate-change skeptics, such as “deniers” who doubt CC is real, and “delayers” who say that it should not yet be addressed, have no valid objections. Instead, they all err scientifically and ethically. The fifth section illustrates that all modern scientific methods—and scientific consensus since at least 1995—confirm the reality of global CC. Essentially all expert-scientific analyses published in refereed, scientific-professional journals confirm the reality of global CC. The sixth section of the chapter shows how fossil-fuel special interests have contributed to the continued CC debate largely by paying non-experts to deny or challenge CC. The seventh section of the chapter provides an outline of each chapter in the book, noting that this book makes use of both scientific and ethical analyses to show why nuclear proponents’ arguments err, why CC deniers are wrong, and how scientific-methodological understanding can advance sound energy policy—including conservation, renewable energy, and energy efficiencies.Less
Chapter 1 begins by stressing the severity of climate change (CC) and showing how, contrary to popular belief, atomic energy is not a viable solution to CC. Many scientists and most market proponents agree that renewable energy and energy efficiencies are better options. The chapter also shows that government subsidies for oil and nuclear power are the result of flawed science, poor ethics, short-term thinking, and special-interest influence. The chapter has 7 sections, the first of which surveys four major components of the energy crisis. These are oil addiction, non-CC-related deaths from fossil-fuel pollution, nuclear-weapons proliferation, and catastrophic CC. The second section summarizes some of the powerful evidence for global CC. The third section uses historical, ahistorical, Rawlsian, and utilitarian ethical principles to show how developed nations, especially the US, are most responsible for human-caused CC. The fourth section shows why climate-change skeptics, such as “deniers” who doubt CC is real, and “delayers” who say that it should not yet be addressed, have no valid objections. Instead, they all err scientifically and ethically. The fifth section illustrates that all modern scientific methods—and scientific consensus since at least 1995—confirm the reality of global CC. Essentially all expert-scientific analyses published in refereed, scientific-professional journals confirm the reality of global CC. The sixth section of the chapter shows how fossil-fuel special interests have contributed to the continued CC debate largely by paying non-experts to deny or challenge CC. The seventh section of the chapter provides an outline of each chapter in the book, noting that this book makes use of both scientific and ethical analyses to show why nuclear proponents’ arguments err, why CC deniers are wrong, and how scientific-methodological understanding can advance sound energy policy—including conservation, renewable energy, and energy efficiencies.
