Editing James Hutton (section)

==Other contributions==

===Meteorology===
It was not merely the earth to which Hutton directed his attention. He had long studied the changes of the [[Earth's atmosphere|atmosphere]]. The same volume in which his ''[[Theory of the Earth]]'' appeared contained also a ''Theory of Rain''. He contended that the amount of moisture which the air can retain in [[Solution (chemistry)|solution]] increases with temperature, and, therefore, that on the mixture of two masses of air of different temperatures a portion of the moisture must be condensed and appear in visible form. He investigated the available data regarding rainfall and [[climate]] in different regions of the globe, and came to the conclusion that the rainfall is regulated by the [[humidity]] of the air on the one hand, and mixing of different [[air current]]s in the higher atmosphere on the other.

===Earth as a living entity===
Hutton taught that biological and geological processes are interlinked.<ref>Capra, Fritjof (1996). The web of life: a new scientific understanding of living systems. Garden City, N.Y: Anchor Books. p. 23.
{{ISBN|0-385-47675-2}}. cited in [https://courses.seas.harvard.edu/climate/eli/Courses/EPS281r/Sources/Gaia/Gaia-hypothesis-wikipedia.pdf "Gaia hypothesis"]</ref> [[James Lovelock]], who developed the [[Gaia hypothesis]] in the 1970s, cites Hutton as saying that the Earth was a [[superorganism]] and that its proper study should be physiology.<ref name=Lovelock1979>{{cite book |author=Lovelock, James |title=GAIA – A new look at life on Earth |year=1979 |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=978-0-19-286030-9 |pages=viii, 10 |url=https://archive.org/details/gaianewlookatlif00love_0 |url-access=registration }}</ref> Lovelock writes that Hutton's view of the Earth was rejected because of the intense [[reductionism]] among 19th-century scientists.<ref name=Lovelock1979/>

===Evolution===
Hutton also advocated uniformitarianism for living creatures {{spaced ndash}}[[evolution]], in [[evolutionism|a sense]]{{spaced ndash}}and even suggested [[natural selection]] as a possible mechanism affecting them:

:...if an organised body is not in the situation and circumstances best adapted to its sustenance and propagation, then, in conceiving an indefinite variety among the individuals of that species, we must be assured, that, on the one hand, those which depart most from the best adapted constitution, will be the most liable to perish, while, on the other hand, those organised bodies, which most approach to the best constitution for the present circumstances, will be best adapted to continue, in preserving themselves and multiplying the individuals of their race.{{spaced ndash}}''Investigation of the Principles of Knowledge'', volume 2.<ref name="Pearson"/>

Hutton gave the example that where dogs survived through "swiftness of foot and quickness of sight... the most defective in respect of those necessary qualities, would be the most subject to perish, and that those who employed them in greatest perfection... would be those who would remain, to preserve themselves, and to continue the race". Equally, if an acute [[sense of smell]] became "more necessary to the sustenance of the animal... the same principle [would] change the qualities of the animal, and.. produce a race of well scented hounds, instead of those who catch their prey by swiftness". The same "principle of variation" would influence "every species of plant, whether growing in a forest or a meadow". He came to his ideas as the result of experiments in [[Plant propagation|plant]] and [[animal breeding]], some of which he outlined in an unpublished manuscript, the ''Elements of Agriculture''. He distinguished between [[heritable variation]] as the result of breeding, and [[non-heritable variations]] caused by environmental differences such as soil and climate.<ref name="Pearson"/>

Though he saw his "principle of variation" as explaining the development of varieties, Hutton rejected the idea that evolution might originate species as a "romantic fantasy", according to [[palaeoclimatology|palaeoclimatologist]] Paul Pearson.<ref>{{cite news | url=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/the-original-theory-of-evolution-were-it-not-for-the-farmer-who-came-up-with-it-60-years-before-darwin-91580.html | title=The original theory of evolution... were it not for the farmer who came up with it, 60 years before Darwin | newspaper=The Independent | date=16 October 2003 | access-date=5 February 2014 | author=Connor, Steve}}</ref> Influenced by [[deism]],<ref>{{cite book | url=https://archive.org/details/jameshuttonhisto00dean | url-access=registration | quote=James Hutton deist -wikipedia. | title=James Hutton and the History of Geology | publisher=Cornell University Press | author=Dean, Dennis R. | year=1992 | pages=[https://archive.org/details/jameshuttonhisto00dean/page/265 265]| isbn=978-0801426667 }}</ref> Hutton thought the mechanism allowed species to form varieties better adapted to particular conditions and provided evidence of [[theistic evolution|benevolent design]] in nature. Studies of [[Charles Darwin]]'s notebooks have shown that Darwin arrived separately at the idea of [[natural selection]] which he set out in his 1859 book ''[[On the Origin of Species]]'', but it has been speculated that he had some half-forgotten memory from his time as a student in Edinburgh of ideas of selection in nature as set out by Hutton, and by [[William Charles Wells]] and [[Patrick Matthew]] who had both been associated with the city before publishing their ideas on the topic early in the 19th century.<ref name="Pearson"/>