• Visit 'Mars' in Space.com's new 'Space Traveler' mini-documentary - Watch here! 🚀

Gaia theory, is it well recognized by science in general?

Feb 22, 2021
1
0
10
Reading the book Gaia in the early 80's was a eureka moment for myself, it all made sense.
Professor James Lovelock - Genius - [1919-7-26 turning 102 this year]
Gaia, embrace the earth mother nature Godess our living planet Gaia.
Lovelock proposed we change the name of our planet to Gaia. He was backed by William Golding - Lord of the Flies - 1983 Nobel prize.
Gaia:- our living planet is a sentient Being in her own right. Her Mr Moon pivotal.
I love the theory, what do you think?
 

Catastrophe

There never was a good war, or a bad peace
Feb 18, 2020
2,251
1,364
3,570
Here is part of the Wiki description:
QUOTE
Topics related to the hypothesis include how the biosphere and the evolution of organisms affect the stability of global temperature, salinity of seawater, atmospheric oxygen levels, the maintenance of a hydrosphere of liquid water and other environmental variables that affect the habitability of Earth.
The Gaia hypothesis was initially criticized for being teleological and against the principles of natural selection, but later refinements aligned the Gaia hypothesis with ideas from fields such as Earth system science, biogeochemistry and systems ecology.[4][5][6] Lovelock also once described the "geophysiology" of the Earth.[7][further explanation needed] Even so, the Gaia hypothesis continues to attract criticism, and today many scientists consider it to be only weakly supported by, or at odds with, the available evidence.[8][9][10]
QUOTE

I was equally impressed when I read the original, and still believe that it contains a lot of truth.
As a scientist, I understand some of the criticism, but now I am prepared to put heart over head and thoroughly endorse the Gaia idea,

You never know, covid may be Nature's (Gaia's) way of saying "enough is enough".

Cat :)
 

Catastrophe

There never was a good war, or a bad peace
Feb 18, 2020
2,251
1,364
3,570
Trevize, we obviously agree on some things and not others, which is not necessarily a bad thing.

As a tiny step, do you believe that there is any understanding between humans and animals? Domestic pets such as cats and dogs would be an obvious start.

Cat :)
 
Nov 13, 2020
70
68
110
Trevize, we obviously agree on some things and not others, which is not necessarily a bad thing.

As a tiny step, do you believe that there is any understanding between humans and animals? Domestic pets such as cats and dogs would be an obvious start.

Cat :)
Obviously every lifeform existing on a planet interacts in a complex way with every other, but an ecosphere would be better considered as a complex homeostatic system, that lasts till the heating of the primary star ends to make life impossible.
I prefer to avoid the term Gaia because of the many New Age manipulations of this concept, often completely misunderstood, preferring the use of other and less ambiguous to underline the strict interrelations between all the elements of a biosphere.
My previous post is also referred to this kind of "ecomystic" interpretations.
Greetings and thanks for the good discussion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ken Fabian

Catastrophe

There never was a good war, or a bad peace
Feb 18, 2020
2,251
1,364
3,570
Trevize
As far as Gaia is concerned, I have not looked into it since the book which is, what, 40 years ago. It seemed interesting at the time. I am sad to hear that it has been hijacked.
My interests now lie in development of the systems from the so-called BB through cosmology, astronomy, geology and current physical sciences - physics, chemistry, etcetera.

Cat :)
 
Mar 11, 2021
13
2
15
I don't recommend changing the name of the earth, because it requires too many people to respond.
However, Gaia’s description is very close to the concept of "Heaven and Man" put forward by Eastern culture. Here I hope to take a look at my question: "The solar system under the eastern wisdom is beyond your knowledge", which is conducive to understanding them. The relationship between.
Darwin's theory of evolution provides strong theoretical support for those "strong men" plundering resources. Now that they have made the earth a mess, they will eventually pay a heavy price. Unfortunately, the weak will also be implicated. (People in the ancient times were not necessarily barbaric primitives, at least not in the description of the ancients in the East)
The natural environment of the earth has become abnormal, and the changes in solar terms are becoming more and more impermanent. This is already a warning to mankind, but it is a pity that we cannot stop.
There is a saying in the East: "If the earth cannot be peaceful, then it will be deserted." Human beings can extend their lifespan through technology, but it will make the earth lose its life.
 
Nov 13, 2020
70
68
110
We all agree that mankind is wrecking havoc the ecosphere of Earth seriuosly risking its self-destruction, but this is not a valid reason to make such pseudoscientific assertions or mention a never existed "Eastern wisdom" that is a pure myth born in the "pop inculture" of the Sixties and transmitted to actual New Age movements.
I remember you also that an uncorrupted Earth wasn't at all a paradise for our ancestors, that had to face up ice ages, megavolcanic eruptions (such as Toba 80000 yers ago, that brought Homo Sapiens almost to the extinction), mammoths, whooly rhinos, unpleasant jokes of fake dead cave bears and many other situations in which hunters can became preys in few seconds.
Not to mention the possibility that could also happen an asteroid collision, with an extremely high possibility for us to make the same end of pterosaurs, non- avian dinosaurs and 95% of mammal species wiped away in the K-T extinctions.
And this is what you call "Heaven and Man"?
With all respect, I think the real geological and biological history of our planet and the circumstances of our arise shows clearly that is a quite bizarre idea.
 
Last edited:
Mar 11, 2021
13
2
15
Modern science is still on the way of development and has not fully understood the truth of the universe, so it cannot represent the truth and treats everything else as pseudoscience.
 
Nov 13, 2020
70
68
110
Modern science is still on the way of development and has not fully understood the truth of the universe, so it cannot represent the truth and treats everything else as pseudoscience.
The fact is that our knowledge of the universe is always in development doesn't mean that is wrong, but only that is incomplete. Some aspects of the universe are now well known, others still unclear, and we can be sure that we'll never arrive at the comprehension of all. This consciousness makes the difference between science and pseudoscience.
P.s.: I advice you thjat your interpretation of darwinism is based on an ethical element that is not only completely out of place in a scientific debate, but also could be a violation of the rules of this forum, that prohibite any ethical or religious discussion.
For what regards me, when talking of science, I put always apart all my opinions about these arguments, whatever they can be, because are out of this contest.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Catastrophe

IG2007

"Don't criticize what you can't understand..."
Apr 5, 2020
545
602
1,760
We all know that everything on Earth, daresay, everything in the universe is interconnected. It is rather more scientific and more logical if we do not go beyond that point. That's my opinion. :)
 
Nov 13, 2020
70
68
110
In fact this is right, but the fact that everything in the universe is strictly interconnected is obvious and has nothing to share with pseudoscience (obviously, I am not referring to you or the author of these wonderful verses).
 

Catastrophe

There never was a good war, or a bad peace
Feb 18, 2020
2,251
1,364
3,570
What we do not know (at least to the best of my knowledge) is whether this connection (whatever it may be) is subject to an inverse square law.

Cat :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: IG2007

IG2007

"Don't criticize what you can't understand..."
Apr 5, 2020
545
602
1,760
In fact this is right, but the fact that everything in the universe is strictly interconnected is obvious and has nothing to share with pseudoscience (obviously, I am not referring to you or the author of these wonderful verses).
What we do not know (at least to the best of my knowledge) is whether this connection (whatever it may be) is subject to an inverse square law.

Cat :)
I am trying to say, we all are interconnected, I mean to say, as a whole universe - by the laws of Physics. It is so strange and so fascinating to me that the Laws of Physics are the same everywhere in the universe. To a lesser extent, each and every living being on earth is interconnected as Earth is a big ecosystem with every one being related to every one. But that doesn't mean that everyone on Earth is connected by an omnipresent force which has mind everywhere, that is really unscientific.
 

Wolfshadw

Moderator
Apr 1, 2020
348
274
1,060
It is so strange and so fascinating to me that the Laws of Physics are the same everywhere in the universe.
I'd be inclined to ask how we know this.
Who is to say that if we take measurements here on Earth and the somehow travel to another solar system and take the same measurements that the results would be consistent; taking into consideration, calculations for planetary and solar differences.

Point being, we only has a single point of view.

-Wolf sends
 

Catastrophe

There never was a good war, or a bad peace
Feb 18, 2020
2,251
1,364
3,570
I'd be inclined to ask how we know this.
Who is to say that if we take measurements here on Earth and the somehow travel to another solar system and take the same measurements that the results would be consistent; taking into consideration, calculations for planetary and solar differences.

Point being, we only has a single point of view.

-Wolf sends
MEGA MEGA MEGA MEGA MEGA MEGA Like.

Cat :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: IG2007

IG2007

"Don't criticize what you can't understand..."
Apr 5, 2020
545
602
1,760
Who is to say that if we take measurements here on Earth and the somehow travel to another solar system and take the same measurements that the results would be consistent; taking into consideration, calculations for planetary and solar differences.
I am very sure that it will be the same everywhere, no matter whether it's KOI-5889.01 or Kepler-1606b or Sagittarius A* or our good ol' Earth.
 
Mar 11, 2021
13
2
15
The fact is that our knowledge of the universe is always in development doesn't mean...
Thank you very much for your suggestion.
I just said that science has not completely solved all the mysteries, and I also don't think he is wrong, but in the process, certain aspects may be controversial, and it will not be determined until there is sufficient evidence.
I am not a religious believer, and of course I will not talk about religion.
The topic is to explore the relationship between man and nature, which has a lot to do with the planetary issue I want to talk about. People's current thinking is based on the fact that planets are not "reincarnation", so when the earth cannot bear the heavy burden, we can transform other celestial bodies. If planets are indeed born from the edge of the solar system and are eventually swallowed by the sun, then the earth’s environment needs to be paid attention to. Excessive destruction of the earth will not only cause the earth to lose its ability to carry living things, but it may also cause a chain reaction, which will eventually lead to The solar system has lost a good place for human survival.
 
Nov 13, 2020
70
68
110
I am inclined to agree, but I cannot say for certain. Again, we only have our one point of view.

-Wolf sends
Not in this case. All galaxies obey to the same gravity laws discovered by Newton and Einstein, for example, and extrasolar planets follow the three Kepler's laws like those of our solar system. Supernovas in all galaxies explode in the same two ways depending in the same ay from the kind of stars from which derive and so on. There may be or are conceivable other universes in which chphysical/chemical laws are different, but there no evidence they really exist.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Catastrophe
Mar 15, 2021
16
7
15
Reading the book Gaia in the early 80's was a eureka moment for myself, it all made sense.
Professor James Lovelock - Genius - [1919-7-26 turning 102 this year]
Gaia, embrace the earth mother nature Godess our living planet Gaia.
Lovelock proposed we change the name of our planet to Gaia. He was backed by William Golding - Lord of the Flies - 1983 Nobel prize.
Gaia:- our living planet is a sentient Being in her own right. Her Mr Moon pivotal.
I love the theory, what do you think?
I haven't read it since it came out but I think Gaia was a metaphor. He wasn't saying that earth was sentient only that there was a feedback mechanism and that plant and animal life kept the atmosphere at an optimum temperature and oxygen level so the atmosphere was optimal for life. The global warming crowd latched on to the idea as supporting their catastrophic predictions but I think it really meant the planet would adjust to man's activity. I've got the book in my Amazon "cart" now and will probably order it soon in addition to his latest - Novacene: The Coming Age of Hyper-intelligence. I didn't know he was still alive and writing at 100 years old, that's just amazes me. He must have really taken care of himself.
I'm also interested in Sir Fred Holye's Diseases from Space that I read when when it came out and how the Spanish Flu got here in the tail of a comet. I've got a copy of the 2nd edition Diseases from Outer Space by the coauthor Chandra Wickramasinghe. It's an update with the last 40 years of space dust research. The COVID is discussed in that one.
 
Last edited:
Nov 13, 2020
70
68
110
I haven't read it since it came out but I think Gaia was a metaphor. He wasn't saying that earth was sentient only that there was a feedback mechanism and that plant and animal life kept the atmosphere at an optimum temperature and oxygen level so the atmosphere was optimal for life. The global warming crowd latched on to the idea as supporting their catastrophic predictions but I think it really meant the planet would adjust to man's activity. I've got the book in my Amazon "cart" now and will probably order it soon in addition to his latest - Novacene: The Coming Age of Hyper-intelligence. I didn't know he was still alive and writing at 100 years old, that's just amazes me. He must have really taken care of himself.
I'm also interested in Sir Fred Holye's Diseases from Space that I read when when it came out and how the Spanish Flu got here in the tail of a comet. I've got a copy of the 2nd edition Diseases from Outer Space by the coauthor Chandra Wickramasinghe. It's an update with the last 40 years of space dust research. The COVID is discussed in that one.
In fact Lovelock did not say any of thesr pseudoscientific claims, that have been arised in the contest of New Age pseudoculture. Also we must remember that in the past Earth experimented other episodes of fast climate changes and mass extinctions. The actual differs from the past ones only for the anthropic origin. Life on this planet will continue long after our extinction.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY