We can't find the internet
Attempting to reconnect
Something went wrong!
Hang in there while we get back on track
Anthropocene angst: Authentic geology and stratigraphic sincerity
Summary
Based on four years of ethnographic observation of the Anthropocene Working Group, this article explains why the proposal to formalize the Anthropocene as a geologic epoch was rejected in 2024, arguing the effort blurred the boundary between scientific fact and political normative claims.
In March 2024, the Anthropocene Working Group's proposal for a formal Anthropocene Series/Epoch of the Geologic Time Scale was formally rejected by the Subcommission on Quaternary Stratigraphy. What does the failed formalization effort reveal about the relationship between science and normativity under conditions of 'climate crisis'? Drawing on four years of ethnographic observation of the Anthropocene Working Group, this article explains how the Group developed its proposal, why it failed, and what it reveals about the social construction of geological truth. The effort to formalize an Anthropocene unit was based on a coupling of science and politics, wherein geo-scientists could make normative assertions in the register of scientific fact. Ultimately, the Group failed because it was seen as appropriating incumbent geological techniques to advance claims about the future, transitioning geology from a descriptive science about the past to a site of warning.
Sign in to start a discussion.
More Papers Like This
The Anthropocene within the Geological Time Scale: a response to fundamental questions
This paper responded to fundamental questions about the Anthropocene as a formal geological time unit, addressing evidence for its recognition within the Geological Time Scale and clarifying the stratigraphic criteria used to define it.
What rejecting the Anthropocene means for the microplastic research community?
This commentary examines the implications of the formal rejection of the Anthropocene as a stratigraphic unit by the Subcommission on Quaternary Stratigraphy in 2024, arguing that the microplastic research community must grapple with how this decision affects the use of microplastics as stratigraphic markers of human-era pollution.
The Anthropocene: Comparing Its Meaning in Geology (Chronostratigraphy) with Conceptual Approaches Arising in Other Disciplines
This article compares how the term "Anthropocene" is used in geology versus other academic disciplines like social sciences and humanities. In geology, the Anthropocene is proposed as a formal epoch beginning in the mid-twentieth century, marked by measurable changes in the geological record from industrialization and globalization. Other fields use the term more flexibly, often extending it much further back in time and applying it without reference to specific geological markers.
Anthropocene
This review examines how anthropologists have engaged with the concept of the 'Anthropocene', identifying four main disciplinary approaches to the phenomena of human-driven planetary change including climate change and mass extinction. Researchers found that the term functions both as a scientific descriptor of Earth system disruption and as a politically and morally loaded concept within and beyond academia.
Palaeontological evidence for defining the Anthropocene
This paper argues that palaeontological methods — including biostratigraphic analysis of fossil assemblages — can be used to formally define the Anthropocene as a geological epoch, as human impacts have created a distinct stratigraphic signature in the rock and sediment record. The presence of novel markers including plastic particles and industrial pollutants supports this designation.