The Anthropocene within the Geological Time Scale: a response to fundamental questions

Abstract

The Anthropocene as a prospective new, ongoing series/ epoch must be defensible against all relevant concerns. We address the seven, still-relevant challenges posed to the Anthropocene Working Group by the Chair, International Commission on Stratigraphy (ICS), in 2014. (1) Concept or reality? The Anthropocene possesses a substantial, sharply distinctive stratigraphic record recognisable through many proxy signals from the mid-20th century onwards;(2) GSSP or GSSA? The Anthropocene can be defined by a GSSP and correlated globally; (3) Past or future? The Anthropocene unquestionably represents geological time, its transformations having already moved the Earth System beyond Holocene norms towards an irreversible future trajectory; (4) Utility? The Anthropocene's distinctive material content allows useful delineation on geological sections/maps; (5) Indelibility? Many of the Anthropocene's transformative effects cannot be subsequently effaced or overprinted; (6) Fit within the Geological Time Scale (GTS)?The Anthropocene represents a unique, youngest, interval in Earth history and strata of profound significance; (7) What is its value? The chronostratigraphic Anthropocene has conceptual usefulness even informally, but would then lack the clarity, stability and recognition that formalization provides. Without its formalization, the GTS would no longer accurately reflect Earth history, diminishing the relevance of geological science for analysis of ongoing planetary change.

The Anthropocene Is More Than a Time Interval

“…Thus, following Waters et al (2022), the Event is described as "extending over tens of millennia" and "encompassing a diachronous, diffuse welter of human activities beginning some 50,000 years ago" (Thomas, 2024). In a similar vein, members of the former AWG state that the Anthropocene Event "encompasses all significant human impacts extending back ∼50 millennia" (Zalasiewicz et al, 2024). Most recently, it is asserted that it "encapsulates all human influence on the planet (and so is about a thousand times longer than the epoch…)" (Turner et al, 2024).…”

Anthropocene epoch proposal rejected - does it really matter?

“…And the term stuck! Several studies have been published on this subject (e.g., Zalasiewicz et al 2024), some firmly opposing the idea (e.g., Demos 2017). There have even been periodicals created with what is becoming a popular term, some charging quite hefty fees for open access (e.g., Anthropocene 2024), a problematic issue that will not be addressed here (e.g., Kellner 2023).An interdisciplinary Anthropocene Working Group (AWG) has been established to study this matter in detail and provide a recommendation to the International Commission on Stratigraphy (ICS).…”

“…And the term stuck! Several studies have been published on this subject (e.g., Zalasiewicz et al 2024), some firmly opposing the idea (e.g., Demos 2017). There have even been periodicals created with what is becoming a popular term, some charging quite hefty fees for open access (e.g., Anthropocene 2024), a problematic issue that will not be addressed here (e.g., Kellner 2023).…”