| |
|
2. Transforming Biology
Not content with her world-historical contribution
to gaian theory, margulis has also revolutionized biology. She has shown
how, amongst the Earth’s first single-celled organisms, the absorption
of one organism by another produced more complex organisms with increased
capabilities which boosted their chances of survival. This process continued
creating more and more complex organisms. Eventually, over the aeons,
these organisms evolved into the species we know today and many of their
capabilities were created through the symbiotic relationships created by different micro-organisms,
“Mitochondria, plastids, and other organelles began as bacteria; thus
acquired characteristics, including their genomes, are inherited.”[8]
Microbiologists had previously believed that evolution in the microbial
world was the result of chance encounters (random genetic mutations),
but margulis showed it was more likely the result of co-operation, “I
argue that symbiosis is far more innovative in the generation of biological
novelty than is the accumulation of chance mutations, although the latter
is more commonly credited as the basis of evolutionary change.”[9] Just how
revolutionary her thesis is can be appreciated from the following quote,
“Only two english-language biology textbooks use symbiosis as their organizing
principle. But neither book evaluates symbiosis as a major mechanism of
generating heritable variation in evolution.”[10]
Margulis has extrapolated her views on the evolution
of micro-organisms to evolution as a whole. Whilst darwinists emphasize
the ‘war of all against all’ and thus ‘the survival of the fittest’ she
points out that the major breakthroughs in evolution have occurred primarily
through co-operation, “The new knowledge of biology alters our view of
evolution as a chronic, bloody competition among individuals and species.
Life did not take over the globe by combat, but by networking.”[11]
Previous commentators, such as murray bookchin, have pointed out the many
examples of co-operation and symbiosis to be found in nature but margulis
has shown, scientifically, how co-operation was the key to evolution from
the very start of life on Earth. Because micro-organisms are the basic
building blocks of all living beings, the principle of symbiosis is the
cornerstone of evolution.
3. The All encompassing Role of Microbes.
The implications of these views are profound
and go far beyond overturning darwin’s views of evolution. It is commonly
appreciated that all living organisms, including oomans, evolved from
the first Bacteria that lived on Earth; virtually all living beings survive because
of the bacteria in their bodies (for example, about 10% of oomans’
body weight consists of billions of bacteria); and that all the cells
of organisms on Earth have been created as a result of the co-habitation
of formerly independent micro-organisms. The fundamental point margulis
makes is that all organisms, including oomans, are physically just collections
of bacteria, “Far from leaving micro-organisms behind on an evolutionary
ladder, we are both surrounded by them and composed of them. .. because
all life on Earth evolved from bacteria, it makes more sense now to think
of beetles, rose bushes, and baboons as communities of bacteria than it
does to think of bacteria as tiny Animals or plants.”[12]
Even scarier, “I hypothesize that all of these phenomena of mind, from
perception to consciousness, originated from an unholy microscopic alliance
between hungary killer bacteria and their potential archaebacterial victims.”[13]
But this is not all that microbes have achieved. Both
margulis and lovelock argue that microbes have created, and currently
maintain, the Earth’s life support system, “Without microbes, life’s essential
processes would quickly grind to a halt, and the Earth would be as barren
as venus and mars.”[14]
4. The Gaian Perspective on Oomans.
Margulis argues, just like lovelock, that
oomans are insignificant in the gaian system, “Gaia is
not the nurturing mother or fertility doll of the human race. Rather,
human beings, in spite of our raging anthropocentrism, are relegated to
a tiny and unessential part of the gaian system.”[15] Whilst
lovelock once referred to oomans as a pox[16] margulis
prefers to see them as a Weed, “Our tenacious illusion of special dispensation
belies our true status as upright, mammalian weeds.”[17]
This view is only incidental to her growing despair about oomanity, “Yes,
my enthusiasm for knowledge is unabated, while my confidence in my fellow
humans, especially fellow intellectuals, has eroded.”[18] It does
not matter what opinions individuals have about ooman nature whether they
believe oomans are good or bad, oomans are still insignificant in the
gaian scheme of life.
The gaian assessment of ooman insignificance leads both margulis
and lovelock to the view that no matter what poisons and pollution oomans
dump into the environment, and no matter how much damage they do to the
Earth’s life support system, they cannot kill the Earth. They may damage
it but it would eventually recover. This is an insight of great consolation.
It is appalling having to witness oomans’ barbaric extermination of the Earth’s
Biodiversity and their destruction of the Earth’s life support system
so it is a considerable comfort to hypothesize that these eco-nazis will
not destroy all life forms on Earth and they will never turn the Earth
into a lifeless planet. Once the eco-nazis have destroyed their own life
support system and disappear from the Earth, the Earth will recover. It
will become green and fertile again, and Biodiversity will flourish once
more.
Originally lovelock and margulis argued that no matter what
oomans did to the Earth both oomans and the Earth would survive. This
was in effect a green light for unrestrained pollution. Thankfully they
later changed their view and argued that if oomans did too much damage
to the Earth then the Earth might retaliate and oomans might not survive
- although the Earth would recover. Whether oomans can destroy not only
their own life support system but all life on Earth is still a matter
of contention but, as far as lovelock and margulis are concerned, it is
not possible.
5. Lovelock’s and Margulis’s Views on Gaia.
There are some intellectual differences between
margulis and lovelock over their interpretations of gaia. Lovelock had
hoped to formulate a grand gaian theory unifying all aspects of the Earth
from its core to the top of the atmosphere - but in his last book he announced
his retirement from scientific pursuits so he seems to have given up on
this task. Margulis regards gaia as a more limited phenomenon, “The biota
is the sum of the organisms inhabiting the Earth: live Animals, Plants,
and micro-organisms. The biosphere which extends some 8 kilometres above
and 12 kilometres below the surface of the Earth, is the place where the
biota resides.”[19]
Whilst lovelock argues the Earth is a single entity,
a superorganism, margulis proposes that gaia is composed of a multitude
of organisms, “We reject the analogy that gaia is a single organism, primarily
because no single being feeds on its own wastes nor, by itself, recycles
its own food. Much more appropriate is the claim that gaia is an interacting
system, the components of which are organisms.”[20]
Margulis repeats the statement in a way which seems to ignore the fact
that it was lovelock who envisaged the idea of a solitary gaian organism,
“Gaia is not, as many claim, a theory of the Earth as a single living
organism.”[21]
She criticizes lovelock’s concept of gaia because, as a single living
organism, it would never be able to reproduce.
6. Margulis’s Connections to the Space Industry.
Like lovelock, margulis has a number of connections
with nasa. She is on a prestigious committee, something like a think tank,
sponsored by nasa, “Every other year since 1980 a nasa-supported group
called planetary biology and microbial ecology (pbme) brings academics,
researchers, and space scientists together .. .”[22]
She is a codirector of pbme-nasa.[23] There is a certain irony in this. The nasa
establishment is no admirer of lovelock’s science of geophysiology. Indeed,
politically it is unlikely nasa will become so. A few decades ago, lovelock
was hired by nasa to invent experiments to determine whether there was
life on mars. It turned out he was able to work out the answer with
the information obtained from an Earth based analysis of
mars' atmosphere. When he predicted there was no life on mars, in effect, he made redundant
nasa’s expedition to the planet in search of life. Nasa was not too happy with
him for undermining their prestigious, high glam, big toy, adventure to
mars. The fact that he’d proved there was no life on mars whilst sitting
in his armchair on Earth didn’t stop them from spending billions of dollars
pretending to search for life on a dead planet.
Space exploration can rightly be criticized for wasting
money on grandiose adventures when there are billions of people living
in appalling deprivation around the world. It is well known that wealthy
nations love spending their wealth on projects which boost their global
status rather than on abolishing poverty around the planet. Given that so much
of the Earth is not understood, when
nasa prefers to explore a lifeless planet rather than the Earth, then clearly there is something
fundamentally wrong with its objectives, “Exploring planets and moons
commands budgets of billions and debate among our law givers, while terrestrial
science barely raises a stir by comparison and receives dwindling funds.”[24] Under
these circumstances space exploration becomes just another means for oomans
to alienate themselves from their own planet. The space race so far has
almost entirely been about escaping from the Earth not understanding it,
learning to appreciate it, let alone learning how to live in harmony with
it.
7. Biosphere II.
Biosphere II was a self contained greenhouse
which was supposed to provide an alternative, small-scale, living system to the Earth.
Margulis was as enthusiastic about this project as the ecologists who
created it. She was critical about it only because she believed these professional ecologists didn’t have the right science to
keep the biosphere running. She believed that if they’d adopted the principles
of geophysiology they would have been more likely to succeed. Quite amazingly
she points out a fact about biosphere II that other commentators have
not mentioned - that it was not self sufficient nor self contained because
it imported electricity, “The 17 acre facility (biosphere II) allegedly
was ‘materially closed’ in the autumn of september 1991 to all but its
enormous intake of external electrical power.”[25]
She concluded the only way to make biospheres operable in the future would
be by using nuclear power, “It is clear that at present we are far from
establishing any biospheres on mars. The energy needed for the mere sustenance
of any biospheres, let alone their use as bases for any bio-industrial
modification of the planet, will require on-site nuclear power.”[26]
8. Managing the Earth.
Whilst lovelock believes high technology and
the aero-space industry are imperative for helping to understand the Earth’s
life support system he is implacably opposed to the global environmental management
of the Earth. Margulis holds a similar view, “To me the human move to take
responsibility for the living Earth is laughable - the rhetoric of the
powerless. The assertion made by some politicians and propagandists that
by preserving biodiversity we can somehow preserve the planet’s life is
just a further example of our big-headed delusion.”[27]
9. Margulis's Support for Terraforming.
Lovelock also opposes the terraforming of other
planets .. “the abominable transgression of terraforming - the conversion
by technology of another planet into a human habitat. What is so bad about
terraforming is its objective to make a second home for us when we have
destroyed our own planet by the greedy misapplication of science and technology.
It is madness to think of converting with bulldozers and agribusiness
the desert of planet mars into some pale semblance of the Earth, when
we should be improving our way of living with the Earth.”[28]
Margulis, however, does not agree with lovelock's stance. She believes geophysiology
could provide the science to enable oomans to create biospheres on other
planets and to make other planets in the solar system habitable. She supports
the idea of trying to make mars habitable. However, she disputes the idea
of engineering a new martian atmosphere by releasing cfcs and fast growing
bacteria .. “colonizing mars so that humans might walk in the open along
its canyons remains a distant fantasy. For the foreseeable future, ecopoisis
(by which she means a small scale occupation of other planets by people
living in biospheres) but not wholesale terraformation seems a possibility
for mars; the former is, however, a prerequisite for the latter.”[29]
It seems strange that margulis supports the terraforming of other planets
but not the Earth.
10. Colonizing the Universe to ensure Ooman
Survival.
Lovelock not only opposes terraforming, he
opposes space exploration. “I think it is all part of the american frontier
mentality. This mars is the ultimate place, we can go there when we have
screwed up the earth. We have the technology, we can fix it. The national
legend of america is very tied up with ‘star trek’ and if you go to scientific
meetings you hear ‘star trek’ metaphors paraded around all the time and
to them it no longer is a kind of story, it is reality and there is a
great danger in their thinking.”[30]
Margulis supports oomans’ invasion not merely of other
planets in the solar system but the universe beyond. She believes this
is imperative not merely in the search for knowledge but for ooman survival.
Because the sun will eventually burn up the Earth and destroy the solar
system, oomans can survive only by moving to another part of the galaxy,
“Earth life will have to evolve to live on other planets, or even, perhaps
around other suns.”[31] In order for oomans to do this she believes they
should establish biospheres on other planets and then use them to terraform
the planets to make them habitable for oomans. These oomanized planets
would then serve as bases for oomans to escape the solar system and explore
the galaxy. She believes geophysiology could help oomans to populate the
universe .. “the full scientific exploration of gaian control mechanisms
is probably the surest single road leading to the successful implementation
of self supporting living habitats in space. If we are to engineer large
space stations that replenish their own vital supplies, then we must study
the natural technology of gaia. Still more ambitiously, the terraformation
of another planet, for example, mars, so that it can actually support
human beings out in the open, is a gigantic task and one that becomes
thinkable only from the gaian perspective.”[32]
11. Reproducing Gaia and Colonizing the Universe.
Lovelock's belief that gaia cannot reproduce because it is a single superorganism, is one of the biggest
obstacles preventing other scientists from accepting his concept of gaia .. “the insistence by biologists that reproduction
is the only criterion for life has plagued me throughout the years. It
was the argument they used to reject all of gaia theory. The Earth cannot
reproduce, therefore it is in no way like a living organism; moreover,
because it cannot reproduce it can never evolve by natural selection.”[33]
This is the theoretical advantage that margulis’s concept of gaia has over lovelock's - that it consists of many organisms which means it is capable of reproducing. What is more, this concept of gaia also provides her with a theoretical justification for space colonization. Margulis supports oomans’ colonization,
and terraforming, of other planets in the galaxy and the rest of the universe
not merely for the sake of guaranteeing ooman survival but because it
would mean that gaia had, in effect, reproduced itself, “Such artificial
biospheres might be recognizable not merely as a human technology but
as an expansion and metamorphosis of Earth’s original biosphere by members
of all of the five kingdoms of life. Gaia would have reproduced, challenging
the objection that gaia cannot be a life form because it is incapable
of reproduction.”[34];
“The importance of the development within the biosphere of such enclosed
ecosystems cannot be overestimated. What we see, rather, is the tendency
of the Earth to re-create itself in miniature. If we take it to its logical
extremes, it says not only that the Earth is alive but that it is on the
verge of producing offspring.”[35]
As far as margulis is concerned, the terraforming of
other planets is critical because they would, in
effect, be gaia’s offspring. To margulis it doesn’t seem in the least
bit anomalous that hi-tech survival pods and terra engineering should
be deemed to be the offspring of the Earth .. “if we are part of the Earth,
so is our technology, and it is through technology that controlled environments
bearing plants, human beings, Animals, and microbes will soon be built
in preparation for space travel and colonization.”[36] The production
of offspring would vindicate her view of gaia. But, it has to be suggested, encouraging oomans’ colonization of space seems too a heavy price to pay for dismissing a trivial objection to gaian theory.
12. The Implications of Space Colonialism for
Oomans’ Relationship to Gaia.
Margulis believes that oomans, especially their space technology,
could play two roles of fundamental importance to gaia. Firstly, oomans' colonization of other planets and solar systems would mean they would be gaia's midwives. In other words, gaia can reproduce only with the aid of oomans. Secondly, “Our
relationship with gaia is still superficial. On the other hand, our ultimate
potential as a nervous early warning system for gaia remains unsurpassed.
Deflecting oncoming asteroids into space and spearheading the colonization
of life on other planets represent additions to the gaian repertoire that
our species must initiate.”[37]
That oomans could play two such vital roles for gaia
seems to contrast with her evaluation of oomans’ insignificance. What
she seems to be saying is that if oomans fail to help gaia to reproduce,
and fail to protect the Earth’s life support system, then this will show
that oomans really are insignificant (and perhaps even a pox). Whereas
if oomans manage to keep the Earth habitable, and make other planets
habitable, they would deserve a higher evaluation.
13. Margulis’s Belief that Space Colonialism
will Benefit Wildlife.
Margulis believes the creation of biospheres
will help to protect what is left of Wildlife on Earth, “If successful,
controlled ecosystems will carry a powerful educational message about
the need for co-operation of people with one another as well as with other
species that support the global habitat.”[38]
14. Criticisms of Space Colonialism; the Creation
of the Fourth Reich on Earth.
Both lovelock and margulis support the space industry for the evidence it provides in understanding the Earth’s life sustaining processes. However, margulis goes far beyond this and supports the colonization of other planets in the solar system and the rest of the galaxy. It is surprising that a founder of gaia could give priority to the promotion of space colonization rather than firstly, the liberatation of Animals from ooman domination and, secondly, the liberation of oomans from poverty. Oomans have been decimating other species ever since they fell out of the Trees but since the agricultural/industrial revolutions they have been engaged in a holocaust against the Earth's Biodiversity and can be described only as eco-nazis. In effect, they have established the fourth reich on Earth. Since the second world war the Animal exploitation industry has created huge numbers of concentration camps (feedlots) and extermination camps (abattoirs) around the Earth which annually slaughter tens of billions of Animals. The nazis might have failed during the second world war but they have been succeeded by eco-nazis using the same technologies and possessing the same oomano-imperialist outlook. Other members of the fourth reich are systematically expropriating all the habitats owned by Wildlife. Eco-nazis around the Earth, rich and poor, east and west, black/brown/yellow/white/or green, are maiming, mutilating, and murdering, hundreds of billions of Animals every year. They are not merely causing the biggest slaughter ever witnessed on Earth they are carrying out the most extensive and most rapid extinction of Biodiversity ever witnessed on the planet.
It has to be asked, why would any decent, civilized human want to encourage the spread of these eco-nazis to other planets? It is obvious, if these eco-nazis ever get into space, that they will do to that planet exactly what they have done to the Earth - they'll carry out the same expropriation and eradication of ecological habitats and the same slaughter of aliens on every planet they reach. It is obvious that a species which is decimating all other species on its home planet does not want to get into space to establish cordial relations with species from other planets but wants to pillage their resources and enslave any species that has exploitative value. The invasion of space will enable oomans to slaughter other species in the same way as they have done on Earth. Doubtlessly hunters support the conquest of space in the hope that having decimated Wildlife on Earth, they'll find better sport in space. If oomans massacre every life form on this planet, except those they can shoot, exploit, or experiment on, then this indicates all too clearly what they are going to do with those species they find in space. Aliens is the name given to Wildlife living on other planets. Conversely, oomans treat the Wildlife living on Earth as if they were aliens who have no rights to live on Earth. As far as the eco-nazis are concerned, aliens are Wildlife and Wildlife are aliens.
Although the chances of oomans' establishing contact with species on other planets around the universe are remote, given what oomans are doing on Earth someway needs to be found of warning aliens about the sort of treatment they could expect if the eco-nazis were able to warp drive around the universe.
It is imperative therefore that oomans should not be allowed beyond this planet until they have stopped slaughtering other species on Earth and have guaranteed the survival of these species through the creation of ooman-free wilderness zones. This is the only way they could prove they are capable of treating aliens on other planets with the respect they deserve. Oomans have murdered enough Animals on Earth that they should never be allowed off the Planet. It’s bad enough that oomans are exploiting the Earth to destruction without letting them try to reshape the universe in their own image.
Any aliens looking at the Earth must be in a state of utter horror at the barbarity of oomans’ treatment of other species on Earth. They must dread the prospect of these vile, gun tottin, garbage spewin, toxic spraying, eco-nazi, boneheads getting into space and visiting their planet.
It’s bad enough that oomans are still on Earth without
letting these mass murderers free to reshape the universe in their own
image. The sooner aliens arrive to exterminate these eco-nazis the better.
As a jew, margulis might well have had relatives who
were forced into concentration camps during the second world war. It
is staggering that she could support the colonization of space by the
successors of these mass exterminators. It is also disappointing that
her abhorrence of the idea of ooman superiority over gaia doesn’t have
any implication for her views on oomans’ relationships with other Animals
on Earth nor her views about the vast number of concentration camps currently being run
by the eco-nazis in the Animal exploitation industry. All she says about
this is that, “This sort of change from killing nearby organisms for food
to helping them live while eating their dispensable parts is a mark of
species maturity.”[40]
This is especially disappointing given her jewishness. For the Earth’s
sake woman, wake up to your heritage.
The biggest advance in evolution that oomans could
make at present moment would be compelling motorists in Carbon debtor countries to abandon their
cars (and aeroplanes) and start walking around on all fours again. This
might be a little uncomfortable at first but at least their faces would
be closer to the ground - which might make it much more difficult for them to pretend
the Earth did not exist. This is about the only way to get oomans living
more closely to the Earth than they are at present.
16. Scientific Speculation.
Some of margulis’s ideas are what could be
called speculative but this has more to do with her interest in the long
term future and her deep understanding of microbiological potentialities
rather than a penchant for the bizarre. She argues that one day, presumably after
oomans have committed ecocide, Racoons might evolve to such an extent
they not only succeed oomans but embark upon the invasion of space, “We
modern humans may never be the agents of the microcosm’s expansion into
space. If human beings become extinct .. the biota may, for a time, remain
confined to Earth. Given time to evolve in the absence of people, the
descendants of racoons - clever, nocturnal mammals with good manual coordination
- could start their own space program. Sooner or later the biosphere is
likely to expand beyond the cradle of this third planet.”[41] Racoons
would therefore acquire the significance in the gaian scheme of things
that eco-nazis like oomans are never likely to achieve.
Margulis speculates that if oomans are to survive then
they are going to have to go green. Nothing surprising here it might be
thought except that she means it literally, “Future humans may even be green, a product
of photosynthesis.”[42] Oomans are currently decimating the Earth’s
Photosynthetic capacity so perhaps going green literally is just about
the only way that Photosynthesis is likely to survive on Earth.
17. The Hope in Decimation.
Margulis not only has a highly fertile mind she has a brave character and doesn’t seek to avoid one of the most frightening facts about existence, "It is an illuminating peculiarity of evolution that explosive geological events in the past have never lead to the total destruction of the biosphere. Indeed .. extensive catastrophe seems to have immediately preceded major evolutionary innovation. Life on Earth answers threats, injuries, and losses with innovation, growth, and reproduction. The most severe extinctions the world has ever known, at the permo-triassic boundary 245 million years ago, were rapidly followed by the rise of mammals .. The cretaceous catastrophe .. cleared the way for the development of the first primates .. World war two ushered in radar, nuclear weapons, and the electronic age. And the holocaust of hiroshima and nagasaki decimated japanese industry and culture, unwittingly clearing the way for a new beginning in the form of the rising red sun of the japanese information empire. With each crisis the biosphere seems to take one step backward and two steps forward - the two steps forward being an evolutionary solution that surmounts the boundaries of the original problem. As heartless as it sounds, a human armageddon might prepare the biosphere for less self-centred forms of living matter." There is no hope of creating a sustainable planet when the Earth is dominated by eco-nazis. The only hope is that they will suffer a cataclysmic annihilation and that the survivors will learn the lesson. But it’s doubtful. Dr strangelove’s military advisors warned that after a nuclear war with russia people would manage to survive deep underground in mineshafts. Unfortunately, this would give the russians a huge advantage over the americans because there was a "mineshaft gap" between the russians and the americans. So, the americans had to launch another nuclear war against the russians because the russians might exploit their mineshaft advantage to continue waging war on america. What is so remarkable about oomans, given their inordinate capability for learning, is their total inability to learn anything.
18. Conclusions.
Margulis
is one of the great thinkers of our time. For those who haven’t heard of her,
read any of her works, or will never find the time to read any of her major
publications, this compilation of articles highlighting various aspects of her
ideas will be a major revelation. It is not one of her major works - only a
summary of her thinking to date. Nevertheless it produces a good number of cerebral
exclamations of the revelatory kind.
|
