The Case for the Anthropocene Epoch Is Stronger Than the Case for the Holocene Epoch

IF 7.3 1区 地球科学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
Earths Future Pub Date : 2025-05-06 DOI:10.1029/2024EF005719
Alasdair Skelton, Kevin J. Noone
{"title":"The Case for the Anthropocene Epoch Is Stronger Than the Case for the Holocene Epoch","authors":"Alasdair Skelton,&nbsp;Kevin J. Noone","doi":"10.1029/2024EF005719","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The recommendation that the Anthropocene be denoted as a geological epoch was recently rejected by the International Union of Geological Sciences. Here, we compare the scientific rationales presented for the Anthropocene, the Holocene and the six other epochs in the Cenozoic Era: the Pleistocene, the Pliocene, the Miocene, the Oligocene, the Eocene and the Paleocene. We also present a historical perspective on the process through which the Holocene was accepted as a formal geological epoch. We conclude that, from a purely geological perspective, the scientific case for the Anthropocene as a geological epoch is stronger than the case for the Holocene and as good as or better than the cases for several other epochs in the Cenozoic Era.</p>","PeriodicalId":48748,"journal":{"name":"Earths Future","volume":"13 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1029/2024EF005719","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Earths Future","FirstCategoryId":"89","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2024EF005719","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The recommendation that the Anthropocene be denoted as a geological epoch was recently rejected by the International Union of Geological Sciences. Here, we compare the scientific rationales presented for the Anthropocene, the Holocene and the six other epochs in the Cenozoic Era: the Pleistocene, the Pliocene, the Miocene, the Oligocene, the Eocene and the Paleocene. We also present a historical perspective on the process through which the Holocene was accepted as a formal geological epoch. We conclude that, from a purely geological perspective, the scientific case for the Anthropocene as a geological epoch is stronger than the case for the Holocene and as good as or better than the cases for several other epochs in the Cenozoic Era.

Abstract Image

人类世的情况比全新世的情况更强
把人类世称为一个地质时代的建议最近被国际地质科学联合会否决了。在这里,我们比较了人类世、全新世和其他六个新生代时期(更新世、上新世、中新世、渐新世、始新世和古新世)的科学依据。我们还提出了全新世作为一个正式的地质时代被接受的过程的历史观点。我们的结论是,从纯粹的地质学角度来看,人类世作为一个地质时代的科学依据比全新世更有力,与新生代其他几个时代一样好,甚至更好。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Earths Future
Earths Future ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCESGEOSCIENCES, MULTIDI-GEOSCIENCES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
CiteScore
11.00
自引率
7.30%
发文量
260
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: Earth’s Future: A transdisciplinary open access journal, Earth’s Future focuses on the state of the Earth and the prediction of the planet’s future. By publishing peer-reviewed articles as well as editorials, essays, reviews, and commentaries, this journal will be the preeminent scholarly resource on the Anthropocene. It will also help assess the risks and opportunities associated with environmental changes and challenges.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信