The global body tasked with naming geological eras, the International Commission on Stratigraphy, has rejected the proposed Anthropocene epoch, the controversial ‘geological’ epoch in which mankind allegedly dominates natural processes. The international commission has now rejected the proposal and has instead split the Holocene Epoch into three different geological ages, all of which were primarily shaped by natural, not human factors.
Excerpts from The Australian:
Behind the scenes is a smaller story of thwarted ambition over whether or not human impact on the planet should define a new geological age.
The [Hothouse Earth] paper by Steffen and his 15 co-authors, published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, a leading science journal, was titled “Trajectories of the Earth System in the Anthropocene”. Anthropocene is the name proposed for a new geological epoch defined by human impact on Earth.
All going well, the naming of this new era might have coincided with the release of the paper by Steffen, a member of Australia’s Climate Council. However, the global body tasked with naming geological eras, the International Commission on Stratigraphy, had other ideas. Last month, rather than announce a new Anthropocene Epoch, it declared it would split the Holocene Epoch, in which we have been living for the past 12,000 years, into three ages.
The decision has unleashed rancour, with claims of ethical lapses, scientific misrepresentation and unseemly publicity-seeking among those determined to declare the age of human planetary impact is upon us.
The ICS says we are living in the Meghalayan Epoch, the third of the three new ages that started about 4250 years ago. The epoch is defined by a mega-drought that caused the collapse of a number of civilisations in Egypt, the Middle East, India and China, about 2250 years BCE. The name comes from the northeastern Indian state of Meghalaya where a stalagmite recovered from a cave provided chemical evidence of the drought.
Defining a geological epoch around human impact has become highly politicised and the decision is considered a blow to those pushing hardest for tough action on climate change.
ICS’s decision is clearly a blow to those pushing hardest for tough action on climate change. The decision is something Mark Maslin, Professor of Earth System Science at University College London, says “has profound philosophical, social, economic and political implications”.
Full story here.
h/t to The GWPF which also has the article
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
So maybe as a consolation prize to the consensus, we could add the “Adjustocene”. It is widely known to have been the biggest factor in the global warming issue. They even use it in their models and algorithms for global temps.
In geological time, the global warming scare will be less than an augen blick.
“BCE”?
I always say that only idiots use “BCE” – because once you’re written “BC” there is absolutely no point putting the E. Also, we recognise a host of other people’s contribution through names like “Watt”, “Kelvin”, etc., then why refuse to recognise those Christians who did the work to create our modern calendar.
And if anyone mutters about “religion”, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, Friday, January, etc. are all named after gods. Likewise my own name “Micha-el” the el name means “Like God”.
And on a very practical note, I read papers with dates in the first century BC and AD, and when I start confusing 13BCE with 138CE I know only an idiot would have created that daft system.
I’m with you, brother.
No real need for “BCE” instead of “AD”.
But it does make a few feel better now though it will confuse kids now and in the future that might actually read an old book.
Mods getting that ” This page cannot be displayed” message again. In addition the link for The GWPF provides a 504 error message. The link in my browser will not get me to GWPF no matter what I try. The elves at Word Press are working overtime.
Maybe instead of the “Anthropocene epoch”, they should have pushed for the “Megaegoacene epicac”?
That would have been more, if not scientifically, more “politically-scientifically” correct.
geological ages are not defined by little droughts.
Classifying the Holocene, a so far ordinary interglacial, into ages is absurd. It shouldn’t even be an age itself, let alone an epoch, IMO.
For comparisons, here is the rest of the Cenozoic Era (the past 66 million years):
Paleogene Period, 66-23.03 Ma
Paleocene Epoch, 66-56 Ma (three ages)
Eocene Epoch, 56-33.9 Ma (four ages)
Oligocene Epoch, 33.9-23.03 Ma (two ages)
Neogene Period, 23.03 Ma to Present
Miocene Epoch, 23.03-5.333 Ma (six ages)
Pliocene Epoch, 5.333-2.588 Ma (two ages)
Pleistocene Epoch, 2.588 Ma to 11.7 Ka (two real ages and two bogus ages)
Holocene (bogus) Epoch, 11.7 Ka to Present (three bogus ages)
The last two subdivisions of the Pleistocene are unofficial, as should be all three of those in the Holocene.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle_Pleistocene
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late_Pleistocene
Ages should be millions of years long, not thousands.
Nick Stokes is right. The Anthropocene may yet be introduced (or alternatively may slowly fade into oblivion)
Geological time divisions are generally as interesting to the average person as a conversation with a lump of basalt, but because the name of the proposed new epoch relates to human activity, every member of the human species suddenly feels entitled as a stakeholder to declare an interest and expertise in stratigraphy. A better confirmation of mass Dunning Kruger effect is unlikely to be found.
At the end of the day geological time divisions are just slices of time with strange names attached to them.
The names aren’t strange when translated out of Greek into English.
And at least in the Phanerozoic Eon, ie the past 541 million years, their start and end dates all mark major geologic and paleontologic events. That goes for last two Precambrian periods as well.
That doesn’t mean that the present system is perfect. Far from it. The Silurian Period (third of the Paleozoic Era) lasted just 25 million years. The Cretaceous (third and last of the Mesozoic Era) endured 79 million. Yet the Silurian has been accorded three epochs, but the Cretaceous just two.
It’s even worse in the Precambrian. The Ediacaran Period of the Neoproterozoic Era lasted 94 million years, the Cryogenian 85 and the Tonian 280 million. The ICS however doesn’t base the Tonian on stratigraphy, but radiometric chronometry.
Historical reasons, rather than sound geology, generally account for these seemingly glaring discrepancies. No reasons why all periods should last the same amount of time, but a factor of over 13 for the same geologic unit seems a bit out there.
Geology is indeed a wonderful subject. It should be compulsory from primary school and up in my view, if only to reinforce the almost incomprehensible enormity of time and the insignificance of Humankind’s temporal existence within it
I agree.
And it’s comprehensible to kids in broad outline.
It’s almost as hard for a mature mind to comprehend geologic time as that of an elementary school kid.
Oh the irony! The warmunists are complaining about lack of ethical standards by the International Commission on Stratigraphy!
There is the point that if the “Anthropocene” was accepted, then it would be the last epoch/age. While ever technological civilisation lasts humans will continue to effect things. Should civilisation fall, nobody is going to care about geological divisions.
“The basic tool for the manipulation of reality is the manipulation of words. If you can control the meaning of words, you can control the people who must use them.”
― Philip K. Dick