  The dominant paradigm in assigning "habitability"' to terrestrial planets is
to define a circumstellar habitable zone: the locus of orbital radii in which
the planet is neither too hot nor too cold for life as we know it. One
dimensional climate models have identified theoretically impressive boundaries
for this zone: a runaway greenhouse or water loss at the inner edge (Venus),
and low-latitude glaciation followed by formation of CO2 clouds at the outer
edge. A cottage industry now exists to "refine" the definition of these
boundaries each year to the third decimal place of an AU. Using the same class
of climate model, I show that the different climate states can overlap very
substantially and that "snowball Earth", moist temperate climate, hot moist
climate and a post-runaway dry climate can all be stable under the same solar
flux. The radial extent of the temperate climate band is very narrow for pure
water atmospheres, but can be widened with di-nitrogen and carbon dioxide. The
width of the habitable zone is thus determined by the atmospheric inventories
of these gases. Yet Earth teaches us that these abundances are very heavily
influenced (perhaps even controlled) by biology. This is paradoxical: the
habitable zone seeks to define the region a planet should be capable of
harbouring life; yet whether the planet is inhabited will determine whether the
climate may be habitable at any given distance from the star. This matters,
because future life detection missions may use habitable zone boundaries in
mission design.
