I read through it and was interested enough to go over to Wikipedia and read the rest of it. To me it is hard to use the Gaia theory as an argument to limit pollution on the basis of global warming. One of the bases for the theory is that Earth was able to hold it's temperature relatively stable despite the sun's energy increasing 25-30%. That would indicate a tremendous capacity for self-regulation. Don't get me wrong, I'm not arguing FOR pollution, I'm just saying the Gaia theory doesn't really support the Kyoto protocols, in fact it might do the opposite.
I am also skeptical about the model as Earth as a living organism, as opposed to just a really big eco-system. It seems like a bit of mystical thinking to me.