Editing James Lovelock (section)

=== Gaia hypothesis ===
{{Main|Gaia hypothesis}}
{{Excerpt|Gaia hypothesis|only=file|hat=no}}
Drawing from the research of [[Alfred C. Redfield]] and [[G. Evelyn Hutchinson]], Lovelock first formulated the Gaia hypothesis in the 1960s resulting from his work for NASA concerned with detecting life on Mars<ref name="Lovelock-1965">{{Cite journal |last=Lovelock |first=J. E. |name-list-style=vanc |year=1965 |title=A Physical Basis for Life Detection Experiments |journal=Nature |volume=207 |issue=4997 |pages=568–70 |bibcode=1965Natur.207..568L |doi=10.1038/207568a0 |pmid=5883628 |s2cid=33821197}}</ref> and his work with [[Royal Dutch Shell]].<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Aronowsky |first=Leah |name-list-style=vanc |date=Winter 2021 |title=Gas Guzzling Gaia, or: A Prehistory of Climate Change Denialism |journal=[[Critical Inquiry]] |volume=47 |issue=2 |pages=306–327 |doi=10.1086/712129 |doi-access=free}}</ref> The hypothesis proposes that living and non-living parts of the Earth form a [[cybernetics|complex interacting system]] that can be thought of as a single [[organism]].<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Lovelock |first=J. |name-list-style=vanc |year=1972 |title=Gaia as seen through the atmosphere |journal=[[Atmospheric Environment]] |volume=6 |issue=8 |pages=579–580 |bibcode=1972AtmEn...6..579L |doi=10.1016/0004-6981(72)90076-5}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last=Lovelock |first=J.E. |last2=Margulis |first2=L. |name-list-style=vanc |year=1974 |title=Atmospheric homeostasis by and for the biosphere: the gaia hypothesis |journal=[[Tellus A]] |language=en |volume=26 |issue=1–2 |pages=2–10 |bibcode=1974Tell...26....2L |doi=10.3402/tellusa.v26i1-2.9731 |s2cid=129803613 |doi-access=free}}</ref> Named after the [[Greek mythology|Greek]] [[Greek primordial gods|goddess]] [[Gaia]] at the suggestion of novelist [[William Golding]],{{sfn|Lovelock|1988|p=3}} the hypothesis postulates that the biosphere has a regulatory effect on the Earth's environment that acts to sustain life.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Ball |first=P. |name-list-style=vanc |year=2014 |title=James Lovelock reflects on Gaia's legacy |journal=Nature |doi=10.1038/nature.2014.15017 |s2cid=125073140}}</ref>

While the hypothesis was readily accepted by many in the environmentalist community, it has not been widely accepted within the [[scientific community]] as a whole. Among its most prominent critics were the evolutionary biologists [[Richard Dawkins]], [[Ford Doolittle]] and [[Stephen Jay Gould]], a convergence of opinion among a trio whose views on other scientific matters often diverged. These (and other) critics have questioned how [[natural selection]] operating on individual organisms can lead to the evolution of planetary-scale [[homeostasis]].<ref>{{Cite book |last=Dawkins |first=Richard |title=The Extended Phenotype: The Long Reach of the Gene |title-link=The Extended Phenotype |publisher=Oxford University Press |year=1982 |isbn=0-19-288051-9 |edition=Revised |publication-date=1999 |name-list-style=vanc}}</ref>{{page needed|date=August 2022}}

In response to this, Lovelock, together with [[Andrew Watson (scientist)|Andrew Watson]], published the computer model [[Daisyworld]] in 1983, which postulated a [[hypothetical planet]] orbiting a star whose [[radiant energy]] is [[geologic time scale|slowly]] [[stellar evolution|increasing or decreasing]]. In the non-biological case, the temperature of this planet simply tracks the energy received from the star. However, in the biological case, ecological competition between "daisy" species with different albedo values produces a [[homeostatic]] effect on global temperature. When energy received from the star is low, black daisies proliferate since they absorb a greater fraction of the heat, but when energy input is high, white daisies predominate since they reflect excess heat. As the white and black daisies have contrary effects on the planet's overall albedo and temperature, changes in their relative populations stabilise the planet's climate and keep the temperature within an optimal range despite fluctuations in [[solar constant|energy from the star]]. Lovelock argued that Daisyworld, although a parable, illustrates how conventional natural selection operating on individual organisms can still produce planetary-scale homeostasis.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Watson |first=A.J. |last2=Lovelock |first2=J.E. |name-list-style=vanc |year=1983 |title=Biological homeostasis of the global environment: the parable of Daisyworld |journal=[[Tellus B]] |publisher=International Meteorological Institute |volume=35 |issue=4 |pages=286–9 |bibcode=1983TellB..35..284W |doi=10.1111/j.1600-0889.1983.tb00031.x}}</ref>

[[File:James Lovelock in 2005.jpg|left|thumb|Lovelock in 2005]]
In Lovelock's 2006 book, ''[[The Revenge of Gaia]]'', he argued that the lack of respect humans have had for Gaia, through the damage done to [[rainforest]]s and the [[Biodiversity loss|reduction in planetary biodiversity]], is testing Gaia's capacity to minimise the effects of the [[Greenhouse gas emissions|addition of greenhouse gases]] to the atmosphere. This eliminates the planet's [[negative feedback]]s and increases the likelihood of homeostatic [[positive feedback]] potential associated with [[runaway global warming]]. Similarly, the [[Ocean heat content|warming of the oceans]] is extending the oceanic [[thermocline]] layer of tropical oceans into the Arctic and Antarctic waters, preventing the rise of oceanic nutrients into the surface waters and eliminating the [[algal bloom]]s of [[phytoplankton]] on which [[oceanic food chain]]s depend. As phytoplankton and forests are the main ways in which Gaia draws down greenhouse gases, particularly carbon dioxide, taking it out of the atmosphere, the elimination of this environmental buffering will see, according to Lovelock, most of the Earth becoming uninhabitable for humans and other life-forms by the middle of this century, with a massive [[Desertification|extension of tropical deserts]]. In 2012, Lovelock distanced himself from these conclusions, saying he had "gone too far" in describing the [[consequences of climate change]] over the next century in this book.<ref name="Johnston-2012" />

In his 2009 book, ''[[#{{harvid|Lovelock|2009}}|The Vanishing Face of Gaia]]'', he rejected [[Climate model|scientific models]] that disagree with the findings that [[Sea level rise|sea levels are rising]] and [[Arctic sea ice decline|Arctic ice is melting]] faster than the models predict. He suggested that we may already have passed the [[Tipping points in the climate system|tipping point]] of terrestrial [[climate resilience]] into a permanently hot state. Given these conditions, Lovelock expected that human civilisation would be hard-pressed to [[End of civilisation|survive]]. He expected the change to be similar to the [[Paleocene–Eocene Thermal Maximum]] when the temperature of the Arctic Ocean was 23&nbsp;°C.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Russill |first=C. |last2=Nyssa |first2=Z. |name-list-style=vanc |year=2009 |title=The tipping point trend in climate change communication |journal=[[Global Environmental Change]] |volume=19 |issue=3 |pages=336 |bibcode=2009GEC....19..336R |doi=10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2009.04.001}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last=Pagani |first=M. |last2=Caldeira |first2=K. |last3=Archer |first3=D. |last4=Zachos |first4=C. |name-list-style=vanc |date=Dec 2006 |title=Atmosphere. An ancient carbon mystery |journal=[[Science (journal)|Science]] |volume=314 |issue=5805 |pages=1556–1557 |doi=10.1126/science.1136110 |issn=0036-8075 |pmid=17158314 |s2cid=128375931}}</ref>