Alessandro and Margaret

Many of us were attracted to become geologists in the first place by a sense of wonder at the extraordinary characteristics and contrasts visible on the earth around us. What forces and materials had combined to form the landscape? When and how did it happen? Gradually, through education and investigation we learned many of the answers, helped by the observations and publications of others, until we had built up a satisfactorily consistent picture of the history of our world. 

Occasionally geologists were confronted with new observations, like those pertaining to evolution and plate tectonics that caused a radical rethink of old certainties. Thus geologists should never be afraid to entertain, with an appropriate degree of scepticism, radical suggestions that might lead to a new level of understanding.

Several years before Trevor Lovelock published his Gaia theory, living in the Middle East,  I had access to high quality borehole data from throughout the Persian/Arabian Gulf region. This included core biostratigraphy and thickness data that enabled an early understanding of processes leading to  concepts of sequence stratigraphy. 

Cyclic sedimentation is apparent in thick limestone accumulations in many parts of the world. It was possible in the Gulf to envisage how individual cycles were actually driven by the lateral accumulation of  linear biomes of shell-bearing organic material, governed by superimposed cycles of basinward regression and subsequent  transgression. The evidence supported the conclusion that this process has persisted there from at least the Permian.

I concluded (but of course never published) that the entire Gulf region had been created over at least 300 million years by the concerted efforts of billions of living organisms. Obviously, the standard geological interpretation is that those animals and plants were mere passengers on a totally inorganic underlying plate.

However, let's not be too hasty in reaching that conclusion. There may yet be surprises in store for us geologists.

Best Regards

Malcolm


On 10 May 2011, at 19:10, Alessandro Michetti wrote:

> Well, Margaret message in my opinion give the rigth perspective for
> this discussion. How many of you are teaching "Environmental
> Structural Geology"? how many "Environmental Department" we have
> now that are full of expert in tectonics? what is the relationship
> between , for instance, active tectonics, earthquakes, and landscape
> evolution, and life? I agree with many of you that the Earth-Tree
> hypothesis, does not need more debate. However, it is very unusual to
> read a message so deeply scientific and interesting such as the one
> sent by Margaret.
> 
> If GeoTectonics is a list only for sending call for papers, I will cancel
> now. If  this a list where I can read messages like the one below, it is
> certainly a good reason to be a subscriber.
> 
> Thank you Margaret, and thank you all the others who sent interesting
> messages.
> 
> Best regards
> 
> Alessandro
> 
> 
> On 10 May 2011 at 11:15, Dr. Margaret C. Brewer-LaPorta wrote:
> 
>> 
>> The idea of the earth being viewed as a superorganism is not new.
>> James Hutton himself proposed this view in 1785 at a meeting of the
>> Royal Society of Edinburgh. He compared the circulation of Earth˙s
>> water, with its contained sediments and nutrients, to the circulation
>> of blood in an animal. In essence, Hutton proposed that the oceans as
>> the heart of Earth˙s global system and the forests as the lungs. James
>> Lovelock proposed this idea again in the 1980˙s with the Gaia
>> hypothesis. There are three parts to the Gaia hypothesis. First, life
>> significantly alters the planetary environment. I think we would be
>> hard pressed to come up with scientists who have trouble with this
>> concept. Secondly, life affects the environment for the betterment of
>> life. This is shown in environmental geology by the ˛natural systems
>> functionˇ concept, where parts of the ecosystem (including life) play
>> an important role in regulating planetary systems. The third part of
>> the Gaia hypothesis is more difficult to acceptœlife deliberately or
>> consciously controls the global environment (while this may be true in
>> the human framework, I do not think all life consciously controls
>> earth systems).
>> 
>> While the discussion here is different from what Hutton and Lovelock
>> proposed as the earth being a superorganismœI thought it helpful to
>> remind folk that these concepts have been put out there for review and
>> scientists have accepted some aspects of the ˛superorganismˇ
>> hypothesis. Such hypotheses are helpful in that they promote
>> interdisciplinary thinking, which is always good. One comment I would
>> have is that tectonics can be viewed as an inorganic process that
>> assists life (which there is ample evidence of in the geological
>> record) or if you are so inclined to think so (which currently I am
>> not) can be considered a ˛byproductˇ of an organic process.
>> Respiration (from my recollection) is not in and of itself an organic
>> process, though it is necessarily for some organisms to survive.
>> Tectonics does not need to be a biological process to support life.
>> The reverse is true alsoœbiological processes need not influence the
>> tectonic process in order to take advantage of it in the first place.
>> 
>> Personally, I think that in the global system, there are many ways in
>> which biologic and inorganic processes interact in the various earth
>> cycles to produce the unique environment the planet has. You do not
>> have to have a model which is entirely biological or entirely
>> inorganicœ.from my limited experience, nature just doesn˙t work that
>> way.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> From: Tectonics & structural geology discussion list
>> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Suresh Bansal Sent:
>> Tuesday, May 10, 2011 10:46 AM To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Re: fine example
>> 
>> I need one help from you. as we know earth is covered with crust
>> (bark). my point is what are the possible evidence to prove that earth
>> is a living organism. On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 8:32 AM, Craig Magee
>> <[log in to unmask]> wrote: Dear all,
>> 
>> I must admit i didn't think this would be my first e-mail to the
>> Geotectonics mailing list! I think it was Aristotle (or some other
>> famous person) that said,
>> 
>> 'It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought
>> without accepting it'
>> 
>> In my view this is what science is all about, how else does our
>> understanding grow? I have been pleased to see many replies to this
>> forum discussing this topic and querying the Earth-Tree hypothesis,
>> whilst still encouraging Mr. Suresh (and others) to continue to
>> question the current 'beliefs'. I'm sure the plate tectonic model
>> sounded odd to many people initially. Yet here we are.
>> 
>> However, I am disconcerted that whenever a valid question is raised,
>> all i see are the same arguments coming back. There appears to be no
>> development. Just links to some pictures and a brief description.
>> Therefore, whilst I enjoy open debates this seems to have run its
>> course, unless new supporting arguments are brought forward to move
>> the discussion on.
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> Craig
>> 
>> E-mail: [log in to unmask]
>> Tel: 0121 414 6146
>> Address: School of Geography, Earth and Environmental Sciences
>>      The University of Birmingham
>>      Edgbaston, Birmingham
>>      B15 2TT
>> 
>> http://www.gees.bham.ac.uk/staff/pgcxm477.shtml
>> ________________________________________
>> From: Tectonics & structural geology discussion list
>> [[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Joaquin Garcia Sansegundo
>> [[log in to unmask]] Sent: 10 May 2011 15:08 To:
>> [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: fine example
>> 
>> I am new to this forum. The truth is I can not believe what I read. Is
>> it a good idea to discuss these things? Best regards to all, Joaquin
>> 
>> At 15:03 10/05/2011, you wrote:
>>> Hello Suresh:
>>> 
>>> I am getting increasingly confused, and I was already confused by
>>> your post quoting
>>> <http://creditsecretsbiblereview.com/credit/blogs/Abiogenic-Petroleum
>>> -
>> Origin.html>http://creditsecretsbiblereview.com
>>> a few days ago. I am guessing: Are you telling us the Earth is a big
>>> sphere shaped tree growing outwardly into space? Are you presenting
>>> that thought as a theory of how the Earth formed/is forming? If this
>>> is not the case, why are you posting these pictures? what are you
>>> trying to say? Please come up with something that one can accept as a
>>> concise hypothesis of how your line of thinking hangs together and
>>> formulate ways to test the predictions following from your hypothesis
>>> which would contradict those of plate tectonics for example. If this
>>> is not something you can do I would recommend to read up on the
>>> literature or just give up to try to persuade people of something (if
>>> that is what you are trying to do) in this way which I find it
>>> seriously, and increasingly, offputting, I am sorry to say.
>>> 
>>> Best wishes,
>>> 
>>> Victor
>>> 
>>> On 10/05/2011 13:29, Suresh Bansal wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Dear All,
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> please observe the new snap of fine example of mountain formation on
>>>> trunk.pls see below link
>>>> 
>>>> <http://yfrog.com/0g72697054j>http://yfrog.com/0g72697054j
>>>> 
>>>> regs
>>>> suresh
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Dr. Victor Bense
>>> 
>>> University of East Anglia
>>> School of Environmental Sciences
>>> Norwich, NR4 7TJ
>>> England
>>> 
>>> tel. +44 (0)1603 591297
>>> fax. +44 (0)1603 591327
>>> 
>>> <http://www.uea.ac.uk/~vva06uyu>http://www.uea.ac.uk/~vva06uyu
>>> http://franciscus.co.uk
>>> 
>>> IMPORTANT NOTICE - This email is intended for the named recipient
>>> only. It may contain privileged and confidential information. If you
>>> are not the intended recipient, notify the sender immediately and
>>> destroy this email. You must not copy, distribute or take action in
>>> reliance upon it. Whilst all efforts are made to safeguard emails,
>>> The School of Environmental Sciences cannot guarantee that
>>> attachments are virus free or compatible with your systems and does
>>> not accept liability in respect of viruses or computer problems
>>> experienced.
>> 
>> _________________________________________________
>> 
>> Joaquin Garcia Sansegundo
>> Departamento de Geologia (Area de Geodinamica Interna)
>> Universidad de Oviedo
>> c/ Jesus Arias de Velasco, s/n.
>> (33005) OVIEDO (Asturias). SPAIN
>> Tlfn: +34 985103150. Fax: +34 985103103
>> [log in to unmask]
>> http://www.researcherid.com/rid/A-2936-2010
>> http://www.geol.uniovi.es/Users/JGSansegundo.html
>> ________________________________________________
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> -------------------------
> Alessandro Maria Michetti
> Dipartimento di Scienze Chimiche e Ambientali
> Università dell'Insubria
> Via Valleggio, 11, 22100 Como
> tel: ++39.031 326231
> fax: ++39.031 326230
> office: +39 3386192982
> personal: +39 3298977014
> http://www.uninsubria.eu/research/chemenviro/cv_Michetti.htm