The Gaia Hypothesis

In the early days of research for this blog, I became very interested in the idea that humans were changing the face of geology on Earth. This theory encompasses the ideas that we are living in the Anthropocene and that humans have been responsible for many of the greatest global events to have occurred since our time on Earth.

After months of research on the cause of global environmental changes I understand that both environmental processes and anthropogenic influences have played a part in nearly every case, although it is hugely possible humans are starting to take over as the dominant force.

The Gaia hypothesis explains how a self regulating system is formed on Earth through the interaction of organic organisms with their inorganic surroundings. The theory was developed by James Lovelock (Gaia, A new look at life on Earth, 1979) and has since been widely criticised.

The holistic view sees every life form on Earth as part of the single organism of Gaia, therefore to lose any species is to lose part of yourself, 'for we are all Gaia'.

It may not sound very realistic, but if you try and forget the images of a goddess-like mother Earth, I think there is something valuable in remembering that all life on Earth is connected. Some foundations for the theory are very understandable, Earth has been transformed by the evolving and self-regulating living system, so that homeostasis is reached by active feeback of biota. The extent of these processes is so huge that even the movement of tectonics could depend upon the deposition of organisms forming limestone strata. 

James Kircher describes the different aspects to the Gaia hypothesis, in 'The Gaia Hypothesis: Can it be Tested', 1989. As well as discussing the theory that the Earth acts as a single immense organism, Kircher describes how organisms affect their environment, and in turn the environment puts contraints upon evolution of the biota in a paired system. Another aspect to the Gaia hypothesis is that life on Earth has stabilising impacts on the planet, in preference for optimal biological conditions of temperature and composition.

We need to hold in mind that every act of man can interfere with any of Earth's processes, whether the result is positive or negative, and whether the Earth, or Gaia, can eventually adjust to these is yet to be seen. Maybe its time to stop thinking of Man vs Earth, but rather as man as part of Earth.

James Lovelock: The Gaia Hypothesis