Gaia a hypothesis or a theory?

Gaia hypothesis proposed that the Planet Earth functions as a self-regulating system, similar to a living organism (states that that living and non-living parts of the Earth are a complex interacting system, in which living things have a regulatory effect that promotes life overall)

It suggests that species whose effects on the environment are life-enhancing will prosper, while others will not, kind of like a system of natural selection for the entire biosphere “those organisms which made their environment more comfortable for life left a better world for their progeny, and those which worsened their environment spoiled the survival chances of theirs”

Earthrise was captured by Astronaut Bill Anders #Apollo 8, 1968

The idea sparked debates and controversy when James Lovelock and microbiologist Lynn Margulis proposed it during the early times of environmental activism 1970s, but Earth scientists now accept many of its basic principles.

In recent times Lovelock himself had been calling Gaia a theory.

In 2006, Lovelock published his book The Revenge of Gaia predicted disastrous effects of climate change within the next few decades, he wrote that “only a handful of the teeming billions now alive will survive”.

One can argue that we have already surpassed Gaia's powers by unintentional geoengineering this planet, pumping immense quantities of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere

One of the paradoxical arguments is that when did Gaia begin, we know that Most Life became diversified during the Cambrian explosion, so the event of oxygen catastrophe which killed anaerobes but at the same time created the ozone layer is a bit confusing if we explain it using Gaia

We have robust evidence to say that Earth does possess the ability to recycle matter via plate tectonics and maintain a balance among the components of the Earth System

During the Great Oxygenation/Oxidation Event, the oxygenation of the Earth’s atmosphere took place and huge deposits of Banded Iron Formations forms around the planet some 2 billion years ago, and it also resulted in one of the first known mass extinctions wiping out anaerobes thriving on surface environments of and pushed them deeper down into the oceans and the crust.

There are some tantalizing phenomena in nature that can be attributed to Gaia, check this Venn diagram out

like the influence of microbes on precipitation, “the same bacteria that cause frost damage on plants can help clouds to produce rain and snow. Studies on freshly fallen snow suggest that ‘bio-precipitation’ might be much more common than was suspected.

Before a cloud can produce rain or snow, raindrops or ice particles must form. This requires the presence of aerosols: tiny particles that serve as the nuclei for condensation. Most such particles are of mineral origin, but airborne microbes — bacteria, fungi, or tiny algae — can do the job just as well. Unlike mineral aerosols, living organisms can catalyze ice formation even at temperatures close to 0 ºC”

So Gaia might not seem a real possibility but at the same time, it may sound foolish to think that on a planet filled with life, life forms do not act in their self-interest to maintain suitable conditions in their respective ecosystems, however, it is not clear when the behavior of many species as be described as a superorganism having some level of consciousness.

I find Gaia a dangerous idea because it can cause us to care less about the planet and keep on the business-as-usual attitude, ending on a positive note I hope that we can come to terms with the current issues and solve them before it is too late.