Earth as a living being

[Hugh]

If I place a ball of Iron in a hermetically sealed box it will never suddenly breath, reproduce, evolve, create its own energy supply, move away from danger or towards food. These are the defining qualities of life and why the earth itself can never be alive.

I think we're differentiating what we define as the Earth.

I'm including all parts of the Earth, and you're only looking at certain parts of it, would you agree?

If we look at a human body, I see all parts of the body and the whole of it, not just certain parts, same as when I look at the Earth.

The whole of the body has inorganic parts it uses to sustain life, without them, the life would die.

The whole of the Earth has inorganic parts it uses to sustain life, without them, the life would die.

[Guest]

I think we're differentiating what we define as the Earth.

I'm including all parts of the Earth, and you're only looking at certain parts of it, would you agree?

If we look at a human body, I see all parts of the body and the whole of it, not just certain parts, same as when I look at the Earth.

The whole of the body has inorganic parts it uses to sustain life, without them, the life would die.

The whole of the Earth has inorganic parts it uses to sustain life, without them, the life would die.

The whole of the inorganic part has no need for the organic part. It has existence totally independant of the alive part living on it. At no point do you have to invoke life to explain the existence of the inorganic part of the earth - its existence is of itself and not alive.

Br Cornelius

[danielost]

The whole of the inorganic part has no need for the organic part. It has existence totally independant of the alive part living on it. At no point do you have to invoke life to explain the existence of the inorganic part of the earth - its existence is of itself and not alive.

Br Cornelius

your not correct. if it was not for life there would be no atmosphere at least as thick as we have now.

[Doug1029]

your not correct. if it was not for life there would be no atmosphere at least as thick as we have now.

You have a point in that life processes have altered most rocks at the surface and have created our oxygen atmosphere (stromatolites). The earth would exist with or without life, but without, it would be a far different place.

Doug

[Frank Merton]

The life we find on the earth occupies but a vanishingly thin layer near its surface, even when you count deep rock microbes. It has no effect at all on what goes on through the main mass of the planet.

Distinguish between life (complex molecules with that mechanically reproduce themselves using material from the immediate environment) and sentience (the experience of life and sensory input and emotions and thoughts). The biosphere is not sentient and is composed mainly of things not sentient. Anyone who says otherwise needs to prove it.

[Occult1]

The best documentary on Lovelock and the Gaia hypothesis:

What a remarkable man.

[danielost]

The life we find on the earth occupies but a vanishingly thin layer near its surface, even when you count deep rock microbes. It has no effect at all on what goes on through the main mass of the planet.

Distinguish between life (complex molecules with that mechanically reproduce themselves using material from the immediate environment) and sentience (the experience of life and sensory input and emotions and thoughts). The biosphere is not sentient and is composed mainly of things not sentient. Anyone who says otherwise needs to prove it.

why can't you prove your statement. finger nails are not alive nor is your hair. but they are important for the rest of the body.

[Hugh]

The whole of the inorganic part has no need for the organic part. It has existence totally independant of the alive part living on it.

The whole of the organic part has every need for the inorganic part. It has an existence totally dependent on the inorganic part it lives with and on.

Together, they are alive as one, just as a human body has parts that are inorganic, but necessary for life.

[Frank Merton]

That the earth is a living being is to say that a rock is a living being. If you want to prove the earth is alive you have the burden. I do not need to disprove such nonsense.

[Guest]

The whole of the organic part has every need for the inorganic part. It has an existence totally dependent on the inorganic part it lives with and on.

Together, they are alive as one, just as a human body has parts that are inorganic, but necessary for life.

The whole of the organic part has every need for the inorganic part. It has an existence totally dependent on the inorganic part it lives with and on.

Together, they are alive as one, just as a human body has parts that are inorganic, but necessary for life.

Your statement is not a response to mine. i said the inorganic part doesn't need the organic part. It exists without reference to the organic element.

This is the fundamental point - take away the inorganic part and there is no life left. If you believe otherwise prove it.

Br Cornelius

[Frank Merton]

Oh I see -- the position is that because the planet has life on it which uses the planet for structure and resources, the earth can be said to be alive.

I guess that means that because there are bacteria on a rock we can say the rock is alive. I think this is twisting the language to come up with a profundity we don't need and is misleading, as it seems to imply something organic about the earth itself.

[Hugh]

This is the fundamental point - take away the inorganic part and there is no life left.

I'd agree with that.

[Hugh]

Oh I see -- the position is that because the planet has life on it which uses the planet for structure and resources, the earth can be said to be alive.

I guess that means that because there are bacteria on a rock we can say the rock is alive. I think this is twisting the language to come up with a profundity we don't need and is misleading, as it seems to imply something organic about the earth itself.

See how our body is composed of both organic and inorganic parts?

65% of our body is made up of inorganic water for example, so most of our body is made up of inorganic stuff, yet we are alive, would you agree?

[Doug1029]

I guess that means that because there are bacteria on a rock we can say the rock is alive.

Ever hear of a stromatolite?

They still survive in Australia. And along the south shore of Great Slave Lake are stromatolite fossils for hundreds of miles, leftovers from the time when the stromatolites created our oxygen atmosphere.

Doug

[Guest]

Ever hear of a stromatolite?

They still survive in Australia. And along the south shore of Great Slave Lake are stromatolite fossils for hundreds of miles, leftovers from the time when the stromatolites created our oxygen atmosphere.

Doug

Your messing with us Doug, here the life creates the rock. The general rule is that rocks come before life.

Of course limestone is the big exception.

Br Cornelius

[Doug1029]

Your messing with us Doug, here the life creates the rock. The general rule is that rocks come before life.

Of course limestone is the big exception.

Br Cornelius

I guess the stromatolites haven't read this thread.

Doug

[danielost]

Your messing with us Doug, here the life creates the rock. The general rule is that rocks come before life.

Of course limestone is the big exception.

Br Cornelius

i think you forget that reefs are rocks made by life.

[Doug1029]

i think you forget that reefs are rocks made by life.

He already said that limestone was the exception.

But there are two types of limestone - the bioclastic version, such as you are referring to, and a limey ooze that precipitates when oceans dry out. When about 60% of the water in sea water has evaporate, the lime starts to come out of solution and is deposited as ooze that then hardens into limestone with time. That's where the "creation geologists" lose it. For the process to happen, you can't have something like Noah's Flood adding more water. Somehow, you've got to have less water in the system - Noah's Drought?

Doug

[quiXilver]

I am a collective of many individual organisms in a process that I call my 'self'.

the earth is a collective process of many individual organisms and so, to me, based on my perspective...

yup, the earth is a living being.

[coolguy]

I believe the earth is alive and I believe that trees, the moon and the sun and stars are alive also.

[Frank Merton]

Yea, sure, the sun is the god Apollo and the moon the goddess Luna and the earth is the goddess Gaia, or maybe its Mother Nature.

Life is a biochemical process called metabolism, and it has specific characteristics. Things that aren't metabolizing cannot be said to be alive. Otherwise the word just becomes a metaphor for I don't know what -- maybe just existence. If we are to talk about things rationally we need rational concepts and distinctions.

[taniwha]

If the earth is not alive when did it die?

[Guest]

If the earth is not alive when did it die?

When was it alive ?

Br Cornelius

[taniwha]

When was it alive ?

Br Cornelius

When it was born.

[danielost]

He already said that limestone was the exception.

But there are two types of limestone - the bioclastic version, such as you are referring to, and a limey ooze that precipitates when oceans dry out. When about 60% of the water in sea water has evaporate, the lime starts to come out of solution and is deposited as ooze that then hardens into limestone with time. That's where the "creation geologists" lose it. For the process to happen, you can't have something like Noah's Flood adding more water. Somehow, you've got to have less water in the system - Noah's Drought?

Doug

according to the bible there was no rain before the flood. the land got water from mist not rain.