Would it be correct to say we reside within Earth?

So basically it wouldn’t be correct because most people are ignorant? 

Not exactly. Consider the fact that the word earth is often used as a synonym for the word dirt. 

Hence why I distinguished between earth (dirt) and Earth (Planet).

If planet earth, yes. 

There are nouns and then there are proper nouns.

Nouns refer to common entities that can vary such as “earth“ (Earth’s dirt). They start with lower case letters.

proper nouns refer to unique entities such as “Earth” (planet). They start with higher case letters.

I noticed I capitalised planet in my previous post. My bad.

It would be correct to say that we reside within the Earth's atmosphere.

But also the Earth? As the atmosphere is part of it.

Convention and Oxford Dictionaries, would  appear to differentiate between Earth and atmosphere....On rather than within.

I think that convention has it,  irrespective of what one might consider to be literally correct.

I thought the convention would be atmospheres are part of planets just as organs are part of humans. Does the Oxford Dictionary also differentiate between eye and human? Or am I thinking too hard?

The Earth and ourselves are within the Earth's atmosphere. 

Does the integrity of all planetary spheres rely upon an atmosphere?

And I assume that the dictionary would definitely differentiate between the human and the human eye. I think also, that the dictionary would differentiate between the human being and the human body.

Such thoughts aren't hard though.

Do all humans rely on hair? Look, it’s not the most solid analogy, but it still holds. 

It’s good I’m simplifying it for you.

No.

Hair is an Interesting social issue though.

Nonetheless:

Life relies on an atmosphere, but does the Earth rely on an atmosphere?

So I fully accept your proposition. In so much as from a residents perspective we are wholly reliant on Planet Earth having an integral atmosphere.

Challenging language conventions thus, is probably not worth the effort though.

Earth produces an atmosphere just as humans produce hair.

Would you consider Earth’s life to be called earthlings/gaians/terrans?

If so, that’s because you consider Life to be a product of the planet.

Just as the atmosphere is. 

You chose to answer the question on the science page, not the conventional linguistics page.  

Ok. But your opening question did ask was it "correct to say". 

The nature of the Earth and it's atmosphere and their associated life bearing qualities is quite well understood, and so the question did not require scientific scrutiny. The resolution of the question,  only really required semantic scrutiny.

Maybe it was you, that located a question in the wrong category.

So scientifically you agree, linguistically you disagree?

Yep. I can run with that.

In so much as, you questioned things in relation to our residence, and the Earths atmosphere is essential in that respect. Though linguistically we define Earth and Earth's atmosphere separately.

Kinda like how we define the universe and the things in it differently although they’re one in the same.

Exactly.

You get on or in a bus, boat, train, plane, but only in a car. If you get on a car, then you are on top of it. Similarly, I would not say that I am "on Earth" when I reach the outer reaches of the atmosphere. Once I had landed, I would be "on" Earth. I don't see any evidence for your first post, that the atmosphere is part of Earth. It's Earth's atmosphere in the same way that my pencil is my pencil. It's a possession that I have, not part of me.

It’s chemically connected to Earth and its flora and fauna. 

Connected is different than a part of.

A trailer is connected to a truck, but not a part of it. I think there is a distinction. I am also "chemically connected to Earth and its flora and fauna," but I do not consider myself part of the planet.