The Anthropocene? Not or Maybe Not Kip Hansen
“The Anthropocene proposal got its start in 2009, when a working group was convened to investigate whether recent planetary changes merited a place on the geologic timeline.
The Anthropocene? Not or Maybe Not
The Anthropocene? Not or Maybe Not
News Brief by Kip Hansen — 5 March 2024 — 600 words/3minutes
BREAKING NEWS: Raymond Zhong, journalist for the NY Times, has a story claiming to have seen “an internal announcement of the voting results” of a subcommission of the International Union of Geological Sciences:
“A committee of roughly two dozen scholars has, by a large majority, voted down a proposal to declare the start of the Anthropocene, a newly created epoch of geologic time, according to an internal announcement of the voting results seen by The New York Times.” [ quotes in this typeface are from the NY Times here ]
The vote is reported by Zhong to have been:
“12 to four, with two abstentions. (Another three committee members neither voted nor formally abstained.)”
This looks to be a fairly substantial majority – even if all five non-voting members had voted to support the declaration of the Anthropocene, that view still would not have carried the day; the vote would have been 12 Against and 9 For. Formally, a vote requires 60%.
Does this mean that the issue is, after more than a decade and a half, finally settled?
No, or at least, only maybe.
“Even so, it was unclear Tuesday morning whether the results stood as a conclusive rejection or whether they might still be challenged or appealed. In an email to The Times, the committee’s chair, Jan A. Zalasiewicz, said there were “some procedural issues to consider” but declined to discuss them further. Dr. Zalasiewicz, a geologist at the University of Leicester, has expressed support for canonizing the Anthropocene.” ….
“Still, to qualify for its own entry on the geologic time scale, the Anthropocene would have to be defined in a very particular way, one that would meet the needs of geologists and not necessarily those of the anthropologists, artists and others who are already using the term.”
When did all this Anthropocene-ism idea get its start?
“The Anthropocene proposal got its start in 2009, when a working group was convened to investigate whether recent planetary changes merited a place on the geologic timeline. After years of deliberation, the group, which came to include Dr. McCarthy, Dr. Ellis and some three dozen others, decided that they did. The group also decided that the best start date for the new period was around 1950.”
“Last fall, the working group submitted its Anthropocene proposal to the first of three governing committees under the International Union of Geological Sciences. …. The members of the first one, the Subcommission on Quaternary Stratigraphy, submitted their votes starting in early February. [these are the results reported here] …. Even if the subcommission’s vote is upheld and the Anthropocene proposal is rebuffed, the new epoch could still be added to the timeline at some later point. It would, however, have to go through the whole process of discussion and voting all over again.”
It seems that there are two more sub-committees that will have a vote on the mater, as this one, the Subcommission on Quaternary Stratigraphy, appears to be “the first of three governing committees”.
So, maybe.
At this moment, the Anthropocene is one of the following: 1) Dead, 2) Postponed, or 3) Pending.
Long Live the Anthropocene.
# # # # #
Author’s Comment:
The Anthropocene is, at its very best, a propaganda term invented by the environmental movement. It is always used to imply the negative consequences of the rise of Humans and their civilizations.
I am heartened that The Geologists, even if for the wrong reasons, have rejected, so far, enshrining this basically anti-human propaganda term in the Geological History of the planet.
There is no doubt that humans have become a or the major biological force on Earth, altering their environments to their liking and their own purposes. Humans have certainly been successful. Darwin might have said this means humans are “the fittest”.
Philosophers would have different ideas and opinions.
Thanks for reading.