Making the case for a formal Anthropocene Epoch: An analysis of ongoing critiques

© 2017 The Authors. A range of published arguments against formalizing the Anthropocene as a geological time unit have variously suggested that it is a misleading term of non-stratigraphic origin and usage, is based on insignificant temporal and material stratigraphic content unlike that used to def...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Zalasiewicz, J, Waters, CN, Wolfe, AP, Barnosky, AD, Cearreta, A, Edgeworth, M, Ellis, EC, Fairchild, IJ, Gradstein, FM, Grinevald, J, Haff, P, Head, MJ, do Sul, JAI, Jeandel, C, Leinfelder, R, McNeill, JR, Oreskes, N, Poirier, C, Revkin, A, Richter, DDB, Steffen, W, Summerhayes, C, Syvitski, JPM, Vidas, D, Wagreich, M, Wing, S, Williams, M
Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
Language:English
Published: Schweizerbart 2020
Subjects:
Online Access:https://hdl.handle.net/10161/21240
id ftdukeunivdsp:oai:localhost:10161/21240
record_format openpolar
spelling ftdukeunivdsp:oai:localhost:10161/21240 2023-11-12T04:18:37+01:00 Making the case for a formal Anthropocene Epoch: An analysis of ongoing critiques Zalasiewicz, J Waters, CN Wolfe, AP Barnosky, AD Cearreta, A Edgeworth, M Ellis, EC Fairchild, IJ Gradstein, FM Grinevald, J Haff, P Head, MJ do Sul, JAI Jeandel, C Leinfelder, R McNeill, JR Oreskes, N Poirier, C Revkin, A Richter, DDB Steffen, W Summerhayes, C Syvitski, JPM Vidas, D Wagreich, M Wing, S Williams, M 2020-08-01T16:00:28Z application/pdf https://hdl.handle.net/10161/21240 en eng Schweizerbart Newsletters on Stratigraphy 10.1127/nos/2017/0385 0078-0421 https://hdl.handle.net/10161/21240 Science & Technology Physical Sciences Geology Anthropocene Earth System Geological Time Scale Holocene Stratigraphy GLOBAL STRATOTYPE SECTION CLIMATE SENSITIVITY CRAWFORD LAKE CARBON-CYCLE ICE-CORE BASE DEFINITION SEDIMENTS MARINE Journal article 2020 ftdukeunivdsp 2023-10-17T09:46:17Z © 2017 The Authors. A range of published arguments against formalizing the Anthropocene as a geological time unit have variously suggested that it is a misleading term of non-stratigraphic origin and usage, is based on insignificant temporal and material stratigraphic content unlike that used to define older geological time units, is focused on observation of human history or speculation about the future rather than geologically significant events, and is driven more by politics than science. In response, we contend that the Anthropocene is a functional term that has firm geological grounding in a well-characterized stratigraphic record. This record, although often lithologically thin, is laterally extensive, rich in detail and already reflects substantial elapsed (and in part irreversible) change to the Earth System that is comparable to or greater in magnitude than that of previous epoch-scale transitions. The Anthropocene differs from previously defined epochs in reflecting contemporary geological change, which in turn also leads to the term's use over a wide range of social and political discourse. Nevertheless, that use remains entirely distinct from its demonstrable stratigraphic underpinning. Here we respond to the arguments opposing the geological validity and utility of the Anthropocene, and submit that a strong case may be made for the Anthropocene to be treated as a formal chronostratigraphic unit and added to the Geological Time Scale. Article in Journal/Newspaper ice core Duke University Libraries: DukeSpace Crawford ENVELOPE(-86.467,-86.467,-77.717,-77.717)
institution Open Polar
collection Duke University Libraries: DukeSpace
op_collection_id ftdukeunivdsp
language English
topic Science & Technology
Physical Sciences
Geology
Anthropocene
Earth System
Geological Time Scale
Holocene
Stratigraphy
GLOBAL STRATOTYPE SECTION
CLIMATE SENSITIVITY
CRAWFORD LAKE
CARBON-CYCLE
ICE-CORE
BASE
DEFINITION
SEDIMENTS
MARINE
spellingShingle Science & Technology
Physical Sciences
Geology
Anthropocene
Earth System
Geological Time Scale
Holocene
Stratigraphy
GLOBAL STRATOTYPE SECTION
CLIMATE SENSITIVITY
CRAWFORD LAKE
CARBON-CYCLE
ICE-CORE
BASE
DEFINITION
SEDIMENTS
MARINE
Zalasiewicz, J
Waters, CN
Wolfe, AP
Barnosky, AD
Cearreta, A
Edgeworth, M
Ellis, EC
Fairchild, IJ
Gradstein, FM
Grinevald, J
Haff, P
Head, MJ
do Sul, JAI
Jeandel, C
Leinfelder, R
McNeill, JR
Oreskes, N
Poirier, C
Revkin, A
Richter, DDB
Steffen, W
Summerhayes, C
Syvitski, JPM
Vidas, D
Wagreich, M
Wing, S
Williams, M
Making the case for a formal Anthropocene Epoch: An analysis of ongoing critiques
topic_facet Science & Technology
Physical Sciences
Geology
Anthropocene
Earth System
Geological Time Scale
Holocene
Stratigraphy
GLOBAL STRATOTYPE SECTION
CLIMATE SENSITIVITY
CRAWFORD LAKE
CARBON-CYCLE
ICE-CORE
BASE
DEFINITION
SEDIMENTS
MARINE
description © 2017 The Authors. A range of published arguments against formalizing the Anthropocene as a geological time unit have variously suggested that it is a misleading term of non-stratigraphic origin and usage, is based on insignificant temporal and material stratigraphic content unlike that used to define older geological time units, is focused on observation of human history or speculation about the future rather than geologically significant events, and is driven more by politics than science. In response, we contend that the Anthropocene is a functional term that has firm geological grounding in a well-characterized stratigraphic record. This record, although often lithologically thin, is laterally extensive, rich in detail and already reflects substantial elapsed (and in part irreversible) change to the Earth System that is comparable to or greater in magnitude than that of previous epoch-scale transitions. The Anthropocene differs from previously defined epochs in reflecting contemporary geological change, which in turn also leads to the term's use over a wide range of social and political discourse. Nevertheless, that use remains entirely distinct from its demonstrable stratigraphic underpinning. Here we respond to the arguments opposing the geological validity and utility of the Anthropocene, and submit that a strong case may be made for the Anthropocene to be treated as a formal chronostratigraphic unit and added to the Geological Time Scale.
format Article in Journal/Newspaper
author Zalasiewicz, J
Waters, CN
Wolfe, AP
Barnosky, AD
Cearreta, A
Edgeworth, M
Ellis, EC
Fairchild, IJ
Gradstein, FM
Grinevald, J
Haff, P
Head, MJ
do Sul, JAI
Jeandel, C
Leinfelder, R
McNeill, JR
Oreskes, N
Poirier, C
Revkin, A
Richter, DDB
Steffen, W
Summerhayes, C
Syvitski, JPM
Vidas, D
Wagreich, M
Wing, S
Williams, M
author_facet Zalasiewicz, J
Waters, CN
Wolfe, AP
Barnosky, AD
Cearreta, A
Edgeworth, M
Ellis, EC
Fairchild, IJ
Gradstein, FM
Grinevald, J
Haff, P
Head, MJ
do Sul, JAI
Jeandel, C
Leinfelder, R
McNeill, JR
Oreskes, N
Poirier, C
Revkin, A
Richter, DDB
Steffen, W
Summerhayes, C
Syvitski, JPM
Vidas, D
Wagreich, M
Wing, S
Williams, M
author_sort Zalasiewicz, J
title Making the case for a formal Anthropocene Epoch: An analysis of ongoing critiques
title_short Making the case for a formal Anthropocene Epoch: An analysis of ongoing critiques
title_full Making the case for a formal Anthropocene Epoch: An analysis of ongoing critiques
title_fullStr Making the case for a formal Anthropocene Epoch: An analysis of ongoing critiques
title_full_unstemmed Making the case for a formal Anthropocene Epoch: An analysis of ongoing critiques
title_sort making the case for a formal anthropocene epoch: an analysis of ongoing critiques
publisher Schweizerbart
publishDate 2020
url https://hdl.handle.net/10161/21240
long_lat ENVELOPE(-86.467,-86.467,-77.717,-77.717)
geographic Crawford
geographic_facet Crawford
genre ice core
genre_facet ice core
op_relation Newsletters on Stratigraphy
10.1127/nos/2017/0385
0078-0421
https://hdl.handle.net/10161/21240
_version_ 1782335229966417920