Thursday, April 30, 2009
The GAIA Hypothesis
On considering the Gaia hypothesis and its implications, I considered the current plight of the world and its connection to the earth being a self-regulating creature. In my opinion, the Gaia hypothesis is not contradicted by the earth's current situation. Animals are self-regulating, but can contract diseases(pollution) and have fevers(global warming). The self-regulation of the earth would be the result of the workings of its components, much as the self-regulation of a human body is due to its cells' workings. However, when foreign substances enter a body, they can cause the body harm. That the earth seems unable to self-regulate completely would liken it to a sickened creature, possibly in the process of dying...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I am not convinced that the Gaia hypothesis is supported by science. While it's true that there are homeostatic trends that are currently maintained, I don't think this can be attributed to the Earth being a "super-organism" that self-regulates; instead, it is merely the product of the the billions of continuous chemical reactions constantly occuring. It is illogical to assume the Earth has some mechanism for maintaining a set point; it would point to a preference and assuming the Earth has some determined purpose borders on theological philosphy, outside the realm of science. Just because the Gaia hypothesis is a workable analogy to compare the Earth to a living organism does not make the analogy true. .
ReplyDelete