home
***
CD-ROM
|
disk
|
FTP
|
other
***
search
/
TIME: Almanac 1990
/
1990 Time Magazine Compact Almanac, The (1991)(Time).iso
/
time
/
111389
/
11138900.062
< prev
next >
Wrap
Text File
|
1990-09-19
|
6KB
|
108 lines
IDEAS, Page 114How the Earth Maintains LifeAn intriguing scientific theory continues to win adherentsBy Eugene Linden
One of the greatest benefits of the Apollo space program was
the image in the rearview mirror as the astronauts rocketed to the
moon. It was the first time earthlings could see their home as a
whole, and NASA's pictures said with stunning force what neither
words nor theories could adequately convey: life has radically
transformed this numinous sphere. The heart-stopping beauty of the
earth set against the dark void of space earned inventor-scientist
James Lovelock the first adherents to a theory that appears to
reconcile science and religion in the study of life on earth.
Lovelock's idea, named the Gaia hypothesis after the ancient earth
goddess of the Greeks, is that the planet is alive and functions
as a superorganism in which living things interact with geophysical
and chemical processes to maintain conditions suitable for life.
Lovelock was not the first to argue that earth functions like
a giant organism; Scottish geologist James Hutton made the same
point in 1785. But Lovelock's formulation is compelling because
science now has the tools to explore some of the vast interactions
that govern global systems. Although Lovelock first articulated his
hypothesis in the early 1970s, in collaboration with microbiologist
Lynn Margulis, it has only recently begun to have significant
impact on the scientific world. Initially, Gaia was only embraced
by New Age types who responded to a holistic view of nature that
blurred the distinction between life and death.
Lovelock and Margulis have modified the theory over the years
to address scientists' criticism that Gaia implied that the earth
acted with a sense of purpose. In its newest form, Gaia has
inspired a flood of research into the interaction between living
systems and the atmosphere, earth and oceans. At the first major
scientific conference on Gaia, sponsored by the American
Geophysical Union in 1988, the austere group of scientists ended
their meeting by giving Lovelock an exuberant standing ovation.
Scientists have begun to regard Gaia more seriously because
the world has forced them to do so. If they are to understand such
pressing environmental problems as the greenhouse effect or the
consequences of mass extinctions, they will have to overcome their
reluctance to look beyond their own specialties: nature does not
necessarily respect the arbitrary boundaries established for
scientific disciplines. By focusing on entire systems, Gaia
provides a framework through which marine biologists, geochemists
and geophysicists can integrate their work.
According to the Gaia hypothesis, earth's atmosphere would be
unstable for life if it were not regulated by the biosphere, the
envelope of life surrounding earth. Oxygen levels have remained at
roughly 21% of the atmosphere for 200 million years, Lovelock
asserts, whereas they should have fluctuated wildly, according to
some geochemical models of the atmosphere. Were oxygen levels to
rise above 25%, spontaneous fires would break out; if they dropped
below 15%, many higher life-forms would suffocate. Climatologist
Tyler Volk of New York University argues that life controls earth's
temperature as well. In a study recently published in the British
journal Nature, he and colleague David Schwartzman asserted that,
without the cooling effects of living things, earth would be 80
degrees F warmer.
Lovelock originally thought that some purposeful design
organized living things to stabilize the atmosphere and climate.
Now he and Margulis believe this regulation is achieved through the
simple mechanism of feedback. For instance, in a hypothetical
scenario, Lovelock shows that a planet covered simply by light- and
dark-colored daisies could control the sun's heat. In this
self-regulating model, dark daisies would absorb sunlight and warm
the planet, until it became too warm for the dark daisies and
instead favored the proliferation of light-reflecting daisies. That
would have the effect of cooling the planet until the cycle
reversed itself again.
Scientists have yet to uncover the actual mechanisms by which
life processes regulate earth's climate and atmosphere. Lovelock
maintains that this makes it all the more imperative that man halt
the mass extinctions threatened by the destruction of tropical
forests, because he does not know what creatures are essential to
his own survival. At the American Geophysical Union conference on
Gaia, Lovelock argued that diversity makes earth both stable and
habitable: "You cannot have a sparse planet any more than you can
have half an animal."
Gaia's critics have by no means been silenced. Some dispute
the degree to which life-forms stabilize the atmosphere and temper
the climate. Others contend that the emergence of oxygen in earth's
atmosphere contradicts Gaia because it made the air poisonous for
anaerobic creatures of primordial times. Evolutionary scholar
Richard Dawkins argues that earth cannot be considered an organism
because it does not reproduce. Gaian proponents respond that the
increase of oxygen in the atmosphere was slow enough to allow the
mix of life-forms to adjust, and physician-author Lewis Thomas
answers Dawkins by coyly suggesting that, through space
exploration, mankind may be acting as an inadvertent disseminator
of earth's spore.
Its critics notwithstanding, Gaia seems to be gaining in
influence among both scientists and theologians. To some, Gaia's
appeal is that it promises to end the long estrangement of Western
science and religion. Even if the biosphere regulates the planet
by feedback, Gaia still integrates living things and inanimate
forces into a unified system, allowing both science and religion
to look at life as something more than a mere accident. Says James
Parks Morton, dean of New York City's St. John the Divine Episcopal
Cathedral and a leading religious advocate of Gaia's: "The very
nature of this hypothesis shows that we are now at a new moment
when scientific and religious inquiry is directed to the same
reality and discussed in a common language."