Achi news desk-
Some say it is a missed opportunity that could have shown that our planet has left its natural working state due to human intervention while others argue that geological units of time are measured in centuries and that this would have been a hasty decision. The debate, although settled for now, may unfortunately continue at a later date
The proposal, if accepted, would have designated the period from 1952 as the Anthropocene. (Image credit: Pixabay)
New Delhi: The International Union of Geological Sciences (IUGS) has announced that they have rejected a proposal to declare a new geological epoch, the Anthropocene.
The geological time scale is a representation of time based on the Earth’s rock record. Scientists had for some time now been pushing for the introduction of a new unit of geological time called ‘Anthropocene’. The name refers to a period of time in Earth’s history that began when human activity on the planet began to make irreversible changes in its functioning.
The proposal, if accepted, would have designated the period from 1952 as the Anthropocene, ending the Holocene period, the 11,700 years of stable climate since the last ice age when human civilization arose.
Both sides of the conversation
The concept of a new unit in geological time, the “Anthropocene” has been floating around for a couple of decades now. It is characterized by human intervention in the natural environment that led to real-time, extensive, irreversible effects in the functioning of the Earth.
Those competing for the Anthropocene content say that the radioactive isotopes spread globally by hydrogen bomb tests would mark the beginning of the Anthropocene and the specific location to characterize the unit will be the Crawford lake sinkhole in Canada.
The concept in recent times has gained momentum in terms of use and has established itself as an important concept because the effects of climate change with time have become real time and irreversible. These effects are discussed in a variety of fields such as the environmental sciences, the social sciences, legal advocacy and so on, so ‘Anthropocene’ established itself as an umbrella term to be used to define this period of excessive human interference with the environment.
The IUGS accepts this use of the term. They still argue that this in itself does not make it acceptable as a unit of geological time. While human intervention on the workings of the planet, manifested by the phenomenon of climate change, wreaks havoc on the environment, it is not enough to be classified as a geological epoch.
The reasons given for this are numerous, mainly among them, for a period of time to be classified as a unit of geological time it must be a significant number of years. Geological time is measured in centuries and the time period recommended for ‘Anthropocene’ is too small compared to earlier designated units of time.
Another important contention in accepting the term is that many think it is a hasty decision. Decisions like this are often made after the effects of a period of time on the environment have been confirmed. In this case, although we are still seeing how these effects are manifesting at this time, in such circumstances, identifying a new geological age is indeed hasty.
Those in favor still claim that this is a missed opportunity as the inclusion of the term ‘Anthropocene’ would have been symbolically important to demonstrate the seriousness of the climate crisis and it would also have been scientifically correct as there are many changes geological changes occurring today due to human-caused climate change.
The debate may have been settled at the moment but the changing contours of modern science, especially a complex and impactful situation such as that relating to climate change, is sure to arise at any time in the near future.
(Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author. The views and facts in this article do not represent the position of News9.)
Follow us on social media
