Talk:Earth immune system

Pseudoscience?
directed to User:Vsmith first

I don't think that purveyors of this theory would say there is scientific evidence supporting it. That's why I stubbed it to "Philosophy". According to the Pseudoscience article: "any body of knowledge purported to be scientific or supported by science but which fails to comply with the scientific method." (which you might have helped write, perhaps ... I haven't looked) The comparison to the immune system is a convenient and readily understandable metaphor and not an extrapolation of mechanisms up to the ecosystem level. That's not true of all supporters, particularly those that specifically believe AIDS is a way of Gaia erasing a cancer, though using this as a metaphor isn't out of bounds for a philosophical concept. Ultimately some of aspects of this philosophy will be testable and others not, and at that point there'll be a decision made by believers individually as to whether to follow the pseudoscientific or scientific route. I don't think it's reached that point yet. Consider that the ancient Greek theory of the atom, the indivisible particle, was first philosophy, then scientifically supported theory, and now a known incorrect view ... if one takes the scientific historical view that the pre-wave theory atom was semantically identical to the Greek concept, which I do at this point.

I'll not remove the pseudoscience stuff yet, until folks have a chance to comment if they desire to do so.

Courtland 17:41, 2005 Mar 27 (UTC)


 * Hmm... maybe it isn't peudoscience - just plain pseudo...? Philosophy?? don't really think it fits, but then maybe anything some kook comes up with could be considered philosophy. Wikipedia doesn't have a bullshit category (maybe it should :-) The idea no doubt is an offshoot of the Gaia hypothesis, so the first paragraph is probably factual re: a metaphorical allusion to Gaia healing herself (new age kooks did a lot of distorting of the Gaia concept). But, that second paragraph is pure unadulterated bullcrap and should be deleted. Vsmith 02:59, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)


 * No idea what to do with this article but I don't think that "anything some kook comes up with" should be considered philosophy. I'm removing that template and adding the environmental one &#32;- car chasm (talk) 17:12, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

I removed Category:Pseudoscience (a very stigmatizing label, IMO; and also contentious); on the grounds that the content of this article does not adequately justify such a categorization; indeed, “Earth immune system” sounds more like a legitimate component of some Gaia hypotheses than pseudoscience. I also removed a link, under “See also”, to the article Pseudoscience.--Solomonfromfinland (talk) 05:27, 13 February 2015 (UTC)