Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Evolution -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: longnshort who wrote (10054)	11/20/2010 2:47:11 PM
From: Solon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 69300

"Organisms cause Ice ages ??" No. But they have survived them at least seven times. And they have always been able to restore a dynamic and UNSTABLE chemical balance. Remarkable, wouldn't you say?? I think it is important to keep the scientific aspects of self regulating feedback models separate from the "speculative metaphysics" referenced below. "Science has tended to confirm the existence of the Gaian balance. However, Gaia's explanation has eluded science. It is difficult to comprehend how such a fine balance could have originated, through the independent natural selection of its constituent organisms. Perhaps, as Lovelock suggested, complex ecosystems tend to develop feedback loops that tend to self-stability. Some mathematical models seem to support this hypothesis. The latest climatic models suggest that the latent heat of the oceans keeps the Earth's temperatures within liveable bounds. And that even if the Earth had a much more elliptical orbit, the Earth's oceans and atmosphere would resist extreme seasonal swings. Gaia, according to this hypothesis, may be a fortunate consequence of both thermodynamics and ecodynamics on a grand scale. Others propose that the Gaian balance is evidence of a Creator Deity. Just because this Theistic evolution hypothesis falls outside of the scope of empirical science, at present, does not imply that it can be dismissed. Some people have argued against the existence of a perfect Gaian balance. For example, there is evidence that there was an extreme glacial epoch just prior the Cambrian. This ice age was so extreme that it is possible that life had a "close call" with total obliteration. The oceanic ice may have become so thick that most photosynthetic bacteria and algae barely survived. However, within ten million years of ice age's end the frond-like Ediacaran creatures were thriving. A few tens of million more and the oceans were teaming with protozoa, plants and animals. Since life obviously did survive, perhaps there was not a total freeze-over. Or perhaps, algae survived near volcanic hot-spots. Even this close call, if it was one, was not an isolated disaster. There been seven or so major extinctions since the Cambrian. Some extinction events, evidence suggests, may have been due to asteroid/comet impacts. The mere existence of such 'close calls' has been used as evidence that the Earth was just plain lucky. On the other hand, the fact that life has survived all of these disasters has been interpreted as evidence for the robust resiliency of the Gaian balance. The Gaia Hypothesis is not without its critics. As originally framed, the hypothesis was a little too wildly metaphorical - almost metaphysical. It left the impression that earth is demonstrably sentient. In later more detailed versions of the hypothesis Lovelock was less metaphoric. His mechanism for Gaia was in essence merely ?feedback stabilisation? - i.e. complex interconnected systems tend to resist change. This toned down version of Gaia was a far cry from claiming that Earth is literally alive. The word Gaia comes from the Greek name of the Earth Goddress. This was originally intended to be taken metaphorically, not literally. Nevertheless, it is not surprising that the Gaia Hypothesis has become a doctrine of the so-called New Age religion(s). Believers in vital force, Earth energies, telluric forces, ley lines, dowser?s energy lines, earth lights, qi gong and feng shui, have all referenced the Gaia Hypothesis as 'evidence' of their claims. All of these claims go beyond the realm of science into speculative metaphysics. All involve suppositions that do not follow logically from the scientific evidence currently available. No doubt these concepts and wild fancies reflect the psychological appeal of the Earth Mother archetype. One can appreciate the mythopoetic allure of these ideas, but it is unwise to take them too literally. What ever the true origin of the Gaian Process, it certainly now exists. Green plants are essential to it. We owe our every breath to them." atelier2000.com