Customer Reviews
Great Way to View the Earth! - By: C. Clayton, 25 Aug 2008 
I read this book sometime ago & is impacted me significantly as it has with many others. I enjoyed the explanation of the huge organism (Earth) that is self- regulating. I also enjoyed that Lovelock points out that we humans are part of the environment & belong here. We will produce waste.
Having said that, any system can overload. Thus, we need to be good stewards of our planet.
As the astronauts left the earthin the 1960's & headed towards the moon they looked back at our planet & did not see borders or countries. They saw the earth as a single unit...beautiful & fragile. It rotated on an invisible stringin the blackness of night. It affected many of the astronauts profoundly.
The book has already helped many more people see the earth as a single unit. If it can continue to do that, hopefully we will find a way to live more harmoniously with the environment on our planet.
Gaia is a great read & a way of looking at things that is both fascination & enlightening!
The Re-Discovery of Common Sense: A Guide To: The Lost Art of Critical Thinking
A masterful and poetic scientific break-through. James Lovelock is a visionary of the highest order. - By: S. Crawford, 07 Nov 2007 It didn't have the direct & dramatic impact of Newton's Principia - a book that radically changed the world, nevertheless James Lovelock's book Gaia - a New Look at Life on Earth, did have a more subtle influence on our world - particularly that of science. In a sense the Gaia Hypothesis prefigured - culturally & symbolically - the evolution of pure science from that classical, mechanistic world view inspired by the uncanny genius of Newton, to a less linear, more holistic awareness of the irreducible relationships (`gestalts') that permeate apparently discreet phenomena. Indeed this kind of more `organic' approach is radically renewing the scope of Science.
What this unique book may also prove to have done is act as a pivotal stepping stonein time: a step back into our most atavistic, indigenous roots, a time when we livedin harmony with the Earth - talk to any Inuit, Aborigine, or Sioux elder & they retain that deeply intuitive & spiritual connection; but just as significantly, a step into the future - towards a re-newed awareness of our responsibility & acute vulnerability as part of the Earth's 'living' ecology. Climate change is the moment that latter reality is returned home to us with the harshest & most dangerous of lessons. Andin a sense, climate change was the mighty prediction James Lovelock issued with his Gaia Hypothesis.
More recently he's said his hope lies "in that powerful force that takes over our lives when we sense that our tribe or nation is threatened from outside". However, he's also said "I do think it will take a disaster to wake us up''. Let's hope, on that score at least, & for all our sakes, he's wrong.
Problem with intent - By: barry rhodes, 22 Mar 2006 
Firstly I will say this, if you are considering buying this book then do so. If nothing else it will make you think & thats always a worthwhile thingin a publication. That being said I have issues with the text.
The data is thought provoking, the hypothesis, that the planet can be modelled by thinking of itin terms of a homeostatic (Self regulating) organism is certainly supported byy the evidence presented & the top-down look at the world makes a refreshing & worthwile change from the 'standard' reductionist approach. Now for the 'but';
Lovelock makes the common, unfortunate &in this book serial mistake (to my mind at least)of confusing effect with intent. For example he cites the chemically unstable composition of the atmosphere, maintained by life, as evidence that Gaia - the world organism - is self regulating for the benefit of life. His argument runs that if this atmospheric balance was not maintained life would die out, therefore Gaia must have lifes best interests at heart & work for the benefit & propagation of life.
This is an all too common confusion accidentaly propagted by many, the underpinning science is engaging, interesting & enlightening but the unfortunate phrasingin terms of the planets intent irritates throughout the book. Just because we can interpret things more easily by considering the planetin terms of an organism does not mean it thinks & feels as a human psyche. Conversly it also doesn't mean it doesn't think like us, it may, but I would prefer this isn't assumed when there is no evidence to support it.
Overall, well worth reading but beware the anthromorphic phrasing. I'm interested to see how his more science orientated book turns out. In the post as I type.
Interesting Hypothesis in Somewhat Convoluted Form - By: Donald Mitchell, 27 May 2004 James Lovelock has created a powerful & interesting argumentin this book that will keep scientists busy for centuries. He notices that there is an ability for the Earth to maintain relatively constant conditionsin temperature, atmosphere, salinity & pH of the oceans, & reductionsin pollutants that defies the simple observations of what "should" happen. From this, he concludes that there is a complex of physical, chemical & biological interrelationships that work like a living organism, which he defines as the Gaia Hypothesis. For defining that concept & providing some of the measurements to establish its premises, he deserves a 7 star rating.
Unfortunately, the argument is expressedin overlong & convoluted fashion. He deliberately limits himself to a nonscientific explanationin this book. The scientific version of the argument isin The Ages of Gaia. Although the book is not long, it certainly could have been condensed into a longish article for Scientific American or The Atlantic Monthly. My second quibble is that the editor was nowherein sightin creating the organization of the book. The key point is often buriedin the third sentence of the last paragraphin a chapter. The argumentin between wanders into all kinds of places where it doesn't need to go. For organization & editing, I give this book a one star rating.
So the average is a 4 star rating. The writing itself is pleasant enough. Don't let the lack of organization & editing put you off, for it is worth your while to read this book. It will remind you of the benefits of the sort of sytems thinking that Peter Senge talks aboutin The Fifth Discipline.
The other thing you will learn is the weakness of scientific work that fails to develop enough field data & to connect enough with other disciplines. I was struck by the same observations recently while visiting environmental scientists at the Smithsonian Institution. The basicsin many of these areas have yet to be measured & evaluated. This book will point countless generations forwardin understanding how our plant maintains its environment that permits life to flourish. Clearly, it is a stallbusting effort to replace "stalled" thinking about the history & future of the Earth. I found the key questions (such as why doesn't the ocean become more saline?) to be irresistible. I think you will, too. Enjoy & think!
a great book.... - By: , 31 Jul 2002 The idea that the planet is a self-balancing system is clearly presented for non-scientists. Fully explained, this model isin fact complementary to other enviromental models rather than contradictory. I think that this book usefully fills a gap between economics, biology & physics, & it is a sobering message that if we do not take sufficient care, we could tip the planet into a new equilibrium (but without the human race).
