The entire range of biota, from the smallest to the largest, from the simplest to the most complex -- plus the air, the oceans, and the land surface -- all appear to be part of a giant system able to regulate:
The entire range of biota, from the smallest to the largest, from the simplest to the most complex -- plus the air, the oceans, and the land surface -- all appear to be part of a giant system able to regulate:- The steadiness of the Earth’s temperature
- The amount of salt in the ocean
- The oxygen concentration of the atmosphere
- The presence of ammonia in the atmosphere
- The ozone layer in the upper atmosphere
Gaia evolves through feedback loops operated unconsciously by the biota, all leading to broad stabilization of the conditions for planet habitability.
The Gaia hypothesis, after being initially ignored by scientists, was subsequently the object of intense derision. Some referred to it as being a form of neo-paganism; others implied that it is “Shirley MacLaine” science. Lovelock feels that by naming his hypothesis after mythological goddess, he did leave himself open to this type of criticism.
Richard Dawkins accused Lovelock of trying to find the largest living creature. Additionally, he argued that the planet does not fit the definition of “living” because it is not a progeny and is unable to reproduce.
Still, decades after the hypothesis was formally proposed, it is still with us. It is now discussed at reputable academic institutions and has been the subject of several professional conferences. Gaia has evolved from a hypothesis to a theory.
Somewhat ironically, as the debate goes on, the Earth is rapidly accelerating toward sentience or having a consciousness mind. To see how this is occurring, we need only look at what is occurring in river basins, natural subdivisions of the Earth.
In Utah, for example, systems of weather, hydrologic, and other environmental sensors are being distributed basin-wide. And this trend will continue as motes and nanotechnologies continue to evolve. Data from ever more sophisticated environmental sensors combined with information from other sources -- human, webcams, remote sensing, etc. -- are linked by wireless and internet communications to data collection and analysis centers outfitted with data-fusion and decision-support tools (including increasingly realistic simulations).
From this developing central nervous center, signals are sent back to water control structures, thereby creating self-regulating river basins, something that will be critical for adapting to uncertain hydrologic variation created by climate change. These river basin networks are also paving the way for sophisticated forms of weather and climate manipulation -- geoengineering. These real-time operating systems will be the foundation for sustainable future development.
Another example of the Earth developing a “brain” was awarded one of Time magazine’s best inventions of 2009: Planetary Skin.
With the theory that you can’t manage what you can’t measure, NASA and Cisco have teamed up to develop Planetary Skin, a global ‘nervous system’ that will integrate land-, sea-, air-, and space-based sensors, helping the public and private sectors make decisions to prevent and adapt to climate change.
According to Cisco’s promotional literature [pdf], the Planetary Skin platform can be thought of as “a globally pervasive ‘nervous system’ assimilating disparate and siloed data sets.”
The Earth is evolving into a single network made up of billions of interconnected processors and sensors. Given the exponential growth of the Internet and linked computers, futurist Peter Russell rightly observes that Gaia is developing a global brain.
During the mid-20th century, Jesuit priest and paleontologist Pierre Teilhard de Chardin placed the concept of the Earth having a central nervous system and/or brain on a philosophical basis. In an effort to reconcile his Catholic belief structure with the truths of science, particularly evolution, he developed a particularly relevant theory. In a posthumously published book (he was banned by his church from publishing his ruminations during his lifetime), he suggested that the Earth is evolving toward metaphysical consciousness; that collectively we and our technology are the process.
During the mid-20th century, Jesuit priest and paleontologist While a technologically-enhanced Gaia may seem a less enlightened concept than the original hypothesis and counter to a “natural living” Earth, it could lead toward further understanding and needed rebalancing of the earth’s ecosystems. It could also result in more efficient and environmentally sensitive use of the Earth’s renewable resources.
In the view of Lovelock, we have two choices: we can either live in equilibrium with the planet as hunter-gatherers, or we can live as a very sophisticated high-tech civilization. He feels the latter is our only path forward. “We have now assumed responsibility for the welfare of the planet. How shall we manage it?” A global brain might be very important as we deal with issues like climate change and the use of geoengineering tools.
Or, a global brain could turn out to be a nightmare like Space Odyssey’s HAL. What if it causes the Earth’s civilization to evolve into something akin to Star Trek’s Borg? Additionally, an Earth brain could certainly cause serious concerns over loss of national sovereignty
As scientists and engineers are developing the technical aspects of the Earth evolving toward sentience, the issue becomes: How will we apply the technology? How will the global “brain” operate in an ethical (value-centered) manner? How does it acquire its moral center? What is the role of the individual? Is there a role for the social sciences or institutional religion?