‘Irreversible’ changes to the Earth provide striking evidence of new epoch, University of Leicester experts suggest
Geological critics of a formalised Anthropocene have alleged that the idea did not arise from geology; that there is simply not enough physical evidence for it as strata; that it is based more on the future than on the past; that it is more a part of human history than the immensely long history of the Earth; and that it is a political statement, rather than a scientific one.
Members of the international Anthropocene Working Group, including professors Jan Zalasiewicz, Colin Waters and Mark Williams of the University of Leicester’s Department of Geology and Dr Matt Edgeworth of the University’s School of Archaeology and Ancient History, have considered these various criticisms at length.
In a paper published in the journal Newsletters on Stratigraphy, the 27 co-author group suggests that the Anthropocene has already seen irreversible changes to the Earth, rather than just to human societies.
Professor Zalasiewicz explained: “As a striking and novel concept, the Anthropocene has attracted considerable support from geologists but also a range of criticism, questioning whether it should really join the Jurassic, the Pleistocene and other well-known units on the Geological Time Scale.
“This criticism is an essential part of the testing of this concept – for the Anthropocene to be taken seriously, the science behind it must be robust and based on sound evidence.
“Our research suggests changes to the Earth have resulted in strata that are distinctive and rich in geological detail through including such things as artificial radionuclides, plastics, fly ash, metals such as aluminium, pesticides and concrete.
“And, while the term does reflect change of significance to human society, and may be used in social and political discussions, it is based upon an independent reality.”
The Anthropocene – the concept that humans have so transformed geological processes at the Earth’s surface that we are living in a new epoch – was formulated by Nobel Laureate Paul Crutzen in 2000.
It has since spread around not just the world of science, but also across the humanities and through the media into public consciousness.
It is now being analysed by an international group of scientists – the Anthropocene Working Group – as a potential new addition to the Geological Time Scale, which would be a major step in its global scientific recognition.
Professor Mark Williams said: “These responses do not mean that the Anthropocene will be instantly formalised. There is still much work to do to gather the evidence for a formal proposal based upon a ‘golden spike’ – a physical reference point in strata, somewhere in the world, to define the beginning of this proposed new epoch.
“And, the benefits of formalising the Anthropocene, both for geologists and for wider communities, still need to be demonstrated in detail. But, these comprehensive responses show that the Anthropocene cannot be dismissed as a scientific fad.
“Humans really have made epoch-scale changes to the Earth’s geology, and analysis of these changes towards their formalisation in geology will continue.”
###
The paper, ‘Making the case for a formal Anthropocene Epoch: an analysis of ongoing critiques’, published in the journal Newsletters on Stratigraphy is freely available online at: http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/schweiz/nis/pre-prints/content-nos_00_0_0000_0000_zalasiewicz_0385_prepub
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
The correct response to this absurd prposal is “come bsck in 50 million years and we can discuss it then.”
I’m not done yet:
egocene
dollarcene
alarmocene
modelocene
propagandacene
mythocene
graphocene
datacorrectocene
imsickofthisscene
Okay, I’m done now.
The Howlenscream
My understanding of geological eras is that they make identifiable strata in the Earth’s record. To do that, surely they would need a little bit of time for strata to form? To do that, I am pretty sure it takes more than a few centuries.
This strikes me more of a clear display of human vanity – oooh, look at us! We are sooo important – look, we have our own strata!
Heck, even the idea of breaking out the Pleistocene and Holocene separately is fairly ridiculous. What, will we have all these little designations for every wiggle of glacials and interglacials within the Quaternary?
Don’t bee too modest. How about 2017cene?
How about Obscene? (^_^)
We are now at the Obscene maximum.
I meant Obscene Optimum.
With 27 co-authors crammed on to this vanity bandwagon, it can’t possibly be about getting themselves associated with a stupid idea.
There is homo lineage back to a 2.8m-year-old jaw and five teeth found on rocky slope in Afar region.
Why not say that is when Homo began making strata “distinctive and rich in geological detail?”
Is this all about Model Ts and SUVs? Then (roughly) pick 1800. Beginning of internal combustion engines was in the previous decade. This would mark the beginning of the transition away from horse-power, recognized by a boundary between much Horse s. and little Horse s.
The height of ego stroking would be snapping a selfie of yourself at a computer screen where there was an article that you wrote about how to snap the ideal selfie, while somebody else made a video of you doing this.
Egocene wins.
I strongly recommend that readers of this blog read the following paper on this that I wrote:
http://episodes.org/index.php/epi/article/view/79720/61837
For the record, NO ONE, and I mean NO ONE, in the ICS working group on this topic ever contacted me about my paper. I even email the link to the chairman and his deputy and although receiving acknowledgements of receipt of that email, never received a response to my commentary. SO, when they state that the answered the criticisms, that is not exactly true.
George Devries Klein, PhD, PG, FGSA
For some reason that link did not work for me. I did try a search on that article in the journal. It’s listed [Title: The “ANTHROPOCENE”: What is its Geological Utility? (Answer: It has None!)], but the link would not pull up a document.
I’d be curious if the editor or anyone from that journal was contacted by this working group.
OZYMANDIAS
I met a traveller from an antique land
Who said: Two vast and trunkless legs of stone
Stand in the desert. Near them on the sand,
Half sunk, a shatter’d visage lies, whose frown
And wrinkled lip and sneer of cold command
Tell that its sculptor well those passions read
Which yet survive, stamp’d on these lifeless things,
The hand that mock’d them and the heart that fed.
And on the pedestal these words appear:
“My name is Ozymandias, king of kings:
Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!”
Nothing beside remains: round the decay
Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare,
The lone and level sands stretch far away.
Percy Bysshe Shelley
These academics want to consider “artificial radionuclides” as a geological feature. Those trace of a trace elements make up perhaps 1.0 x 10⁻⁵⁰ of the Earth’s surface. Geologically, they are beyond insignificant. We’ve stumbled into the homeopathy wing of the climate science loony bin. Run away! Run away!
Hysteriacene – the age when no decade could pass without a planet destroying, top priority catastrophic problem to solve!
Taxacene – the age when a tax on any problem could change the world
“But, these comprehensive responses show that the Anthropocene cannot be dismissed as a scientific fad.
It hasn’t been long enough to make that determination. Why jump the gun? It’s not like the Pleistocene was given that name when it first began. It was named after the fact. If the “Anthropocene” designation does turn out to be a scientific fad and gets reversed, it may receive the nickname Flipflopocene in honor of these people.
It’s called ‘hubris’ friends and it’s a form of insanity that has become epidemic.
As far as I’m concerned, we are still in the Pleistocene. The Holocene is just an inter-glacial.
Stupidocene
The Age of Hubris.
hubrisocene
Douglas Adams got there first with his description of a an entire archaeological layer of shoes, caused by “The Shoe Event Horizon”.
He was a geek too. The answer to everything is 42. 42 in ASCII is *, meaning anything.
The identifying fossil of the Anthropocene will be the smart phone, present in all continents, rapidly evolving, and thin enough to span the entire thin sedimentary layer that represents this time period.
Hubris !
Orsonwellesocene
It is really too early to have declared the Pleistocine over and have started the Holocene. Maybe we should wait at least two million years before decideing whether the Pleistocine should be declared over let alone decide when the Holocene should be declared over. The last ice age and the current interglacial period are not that different from the previous several ice ages and interglacial periods except that the current interglacial period has been cooler then the previous 3 intergalcial periods. A major concern should be that CO2 levels have become dangerously low over the past several millions of years but I belieived that the burning of fossil fuels have helped the situation at least somewhat. Maybe we should be doing more to release carbon that is tied up in carbonate rocks so that plant life can make use of it.
Misathroposcene
Hysteroscene. Phobioscene. Lithoconservatoscene. Parascientoscene. Paracitoscene. Picoscene. Nonscene.
Geolocalky we allready have the “Recent”, and the “Present” (=1950). So “AP” covers the Anthropogene Event adeqately. There is not even a scientific concensus when this Epoch should start.
Fakenewsocene?