Talk:Biosphere

Uhm. I'm not genius at ecology, but I do believe that someone has seriously messed with this page. I just cleaned out a silly face and an explicit irrelevant sentence, but I believe the quote for Suess's defintion has definitely been messed around with. - GML

It says a biosphere is part of a planet's terrestrial structure. Isn't that to assume that only a planet "Earth-like" can hold life? -Adrian

It said nothing about size!!!!

Paragraph structure

What is this, "Cliffs Notes". What happened to writing in paragraphs? - Marshman 22:45, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Not trying to be difficult here, but the following seems more appropriate for Oceanography or the like and at best remotely pertinent here (which is sort of why we have hyperlinks):

---

Ocean and atmosphere connections

Oceanography is intimately linked to understanding global warming and other global environmental concerns.

Our planet is invested with two great oceans;
one visible, the other invisible; one underfoot, the other overhead; one entirely envelopes it, the other covers about two thirds of its surface.

Matthew F. Maury (1855) The Physical Geography of the Seas and Its Meteorology.

Also see: Colorado Center for Astrodynamics Research

---

I moved it back here. Also, is that a quote (Maury, 1855) ?- Marshman 22:56, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Biosphere 1, 2, 3, and J

Um, why does this section start talking about biomes, when it really has nothing to do with biospheres 1, 2, 3, or J? I think that it needs a new section on biomes, but I don't have time to do it myself... ROBO 64.39.149.198 00:09, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

---

Wilderness - Article Improvement Drive

Wikipedians watching this page may be interested to vote for Wilderness in the Article Improvement Drive. Kind regards, Jtneill - Talk 03:25, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Anyone know about this question?

What is biospher 1, and I want more than just the earth. qoute unqoute. that was my teachers words for a question can any of you help please?

YOU need to give it some thought (your assignment). When many people think of "earth" they think only that it refers to the physical structure of a planet. What is it about "earth" that would lead us to call it "biosphere 1"? What part of your answer might involve things outside of or beyond the earth? - Marshman

BIOS-3

Why was BIOS-3 numbered 3? Did the Soviets really fail to talk about it at all? I would have thought they would have been talking about it a lot since it appears to have been relatively successful. Or did the creators of BIOS-2 just not notice BIOS-3 when naming BIOS-2? Nil Einne 15:41, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Super-Dave

I'm no scientist, but I'm pretty sure the biosphere wasn't discovered by Super-Dave, or perhaps if indeed he did discover the biosphere, he's worthy of an article of his own? I'm going to assume that the first line of this article is vandalism... Sk8a H8a 00:08, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

The Eden Project

Shouldn't the Eden Project have a mention in here?

Bebs

Okay, I see where everyone in this project was going, but did they seriously think that it was going to work? Eventually, you will run out of oxygen, so it was a waste of millions of dollars.

Oh, come on. Did you not actually read the article? why do you think that they had the algea? it takes their CO2 and turns it into oxygen, and we turn the oxygen into C02, see the article on Photosynthesis. 64.39.149.198 00:04, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Biosphere J?

I can't find definitive information on this one anywhere. If it can't be cited, it needs to go. --profg 06:01, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

It was an experiment in Japan, and internet information is very hard to find on it, but it is real.[1]. There are sure to be published citations about it somewhere.

• "Japanese team led by Kenjii Nitta developing Biosphere J" from History of Biospheres
• Paywalled reference found by searching on "Biosphere-J Nitta": doi:10.1016/j.asr.2005.03.100 (note Keiji vs Kenjii spelling variations) --Paleorthid (talk) 21:52, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

• The information of a system named as "Biosphere J" is very rare because the system is usually called with other name. See "Dynamic Simulation of Pressure Control System for the Closed Ecology Experiment Facility" which is a report by NITTA Keiji et al(1998). And the system(in Japanese, in English but not same as Japanese version) at Aomori Prefecture. (Institute for Environmental Sciences) --Janus01 (talk) 02:27, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Hyperbaric Biosphere

I have removed content related to the Hyperbaric Biosphere project. It is unbalanced considering the summary treatment of other, more notable, Biosphere projects. If it can meet notability criteria, Hyperbaric Biosphere should be a stand-alone article. If notable, it deserves no more than one-sentence in this article. -- Paleorthid (talk) 21:29, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

I've removed it a couple of times, seems an/several anons want it there but don't want to discuss. Vsmith (talk) 02:49, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Edited accordingly, per User:Paleorthid. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.18.130.171 (talk) 21:53, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Hey, we're making progress. How about the main point of Paleorthid's suggestion - create an independent article if it is notable? Meanwhile, I've cut the proposed expansion bit and the spamlink it included as a reference. Also removed the Dr. as we don't include such titles in Wikipedia articles. Now, how about some reliable sources to show notability - as this is a scientific concept, we'll need peer reviewed material covering the research. The link to a creationist promo/sales site just won't work here. Vsmith (talk) 01:47, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Bad link ?

The following link is in the "Biosphere 1, 2, 3, and J" section:

"Biosphere 3 (aka BIOS-3) - Experiment to be conducted starting Jan 2008 in the Gary C. Comer Geochemistry building at Columbia University's Lamont Campus in Palisades, New York."

However, when I follow the link, the article says:

"BIOS-3 was a closed ecosystem at the Institute of Biophysics in Krasnoyarsk, Siberia, in what was then the Soviet Union."

Which is correct ? StuRat (talk) 03:31, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

I've concluded that the description in the link is wrong and have changed it to match the article to which it points. StuRat (talk) 00:18, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Scope of Introduction

I rewrote the intro, since as a non-specialist I found the last version confusing. I suggest it could use some broad descriptions, such as approximations of the biosphere's extent and total mass, to be elaborated in the appropriate sections. Maybe a simple explanation of how it's used in the various disciplines, if that's possible. I thought the rest was a little too specific for the intro, although the evolutionary history of the biosphere would make a good section in itself. Yellowdesk60 (talk) 23:57, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Restored previous version with reference. Please don't remove named references, at least not without fixing other refs that depend on it.

The article could be expanded, but the intro seems OK to me. Perhaps a biologist should weigh in here. Vsmith (talk) 00:11, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing out the ref problem, I'm new at this. My concerns: jargon, ambiguity, and controversial material. e.g. ecosystem is specialized, and could be replaced with 'life.' 'Sum' and 'zone' leave open what kinds of measurement are meant: total mass in kg, 3-D shape of the zone of life, geographic area? I focused on who uses the term (geoscientists and ecologists), and how. There seem to be at least two valid uses, and this wasn't clear. There's some controversy about considering all of life as a system (Gaia and bio/geophysiology), and the evolution sentence is ambiguous there. Without clarifying if the biosphere evolves as a single entity, this sentence just says that life has evolved for ~3.5by, and started at the beginning. It will still need expansion, especially to make explicit the different senses in different disciplines. Yellowdesk60 (talk) 22:00, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Biospherics

On the page John P. Allen, we are told that Allen is a proponent of the science of biospherics, which redirects to this article. But there is no paragraph here describing what biospherics is. However, the term biospheric science does appear to exist -- 99.233.186.4 (talk) 05:46, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

There used to be a paragraph mentioning biospherics, but it was deleted long ago in an act of vandalism. I've restored it. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 18:50, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Something perhaps to add to "Specific biospheres" section

Theoretically, planets in other star systems light-years away have biospheres of their own. In fact, they must, as it is statistically impossible for us to be alone in the Universe.

Even within this star system, the extinct Martian Biosphere was a biosphere that existed alongside the Earthling Biosphere. Sadly, the Martian Biosphere became extinct before the Earthling Biosphere entered its Phanerozoic Eon (current eon). The long-extinct Martian Biosphere never evolved beyond unicellular life. Even so, we know it existed, however, due to fossils found through microscopic analysis of Martian rocks.

There may even be a surviving unicellular biosphere sharing a star system with our own, on Jupiter's moon Europa. (Interestingly, "Europa" is the Ancient Greek word for "World," so it would be all the more fitting if indeed this moon turns out to be an inhabited world.) Though covered in ice, Europa is believed to be a volcanically active moon, and it may have geothermal vents to bring up warmth and nutrients on which unicellular life could survive or even thrive.

While Earth almost certainly has the only biosphere with multicellular organisms in this star system, statistics dictate that there must be other biospheres in the Universe with multicellular life. The Mysterious El Willstro (talk) 08:39, 21 July 2010 (UTC)