5 . 3 . 2 0 2 4
I N T E R N A T I O N A L U N I O N O F G E O L O G I C A L S C I E N C E S
( I U G S , 1 9 6 1 )
I N T E R N A T I O N A L C O M M I S S I O N O N S T R A T I G R A P H Y
( I C S , 1 9 7 4 )
S U B C O M M I S S I O N O N Q U A T E R N A RY S T R A T I G R A P H Y
A N T H RO P O C E N E WO R K I N G G RO U P
( A W G , 2 0 0 9 )
I N T E R N AT I O N A L C O M M I S S I O N O N
S T R AT I G R A P H Y:
• it precisely defines units of the International GeologicTime Scale, thus
setting global standards for the fundamental scale for expressing the
history of the Earth
• the official keeper of (geologic) time
Global Boundary Stratotype Section and
Points (GSSPs),"golden spikes"
Ediacara,Austrálie
( E . C . E L L I S , A N T H R O P O C E N E : A V E R Y S H O R T
I N T R O D U C T I O N , O U P 2 0 1 8 )
M O Ž N É P O Č Á T K Y A N T RO P O C É N U
(návrhy na GSSP tučně)
M O Ž N É P O Č Á T K Y A N T RO P O C É N U
(návrhy na GSSP tučně)
William Ruddiman,Early Anthropocene Hypothesis
Andreas Malm, Jason Moore;Plantationocene,"dlouhé 16. století"
Paul Crutzen
AWG
Simon Lewis,Mark Maslin
Orbis Hypothesis
A K T U Á L N Í F O R M U L A C E O T Á Z K Y:
J E A N T RO P O C É N E P O C H A , N E B O
U D Á L O S T ?
• E. Ellis:
“We need to think about this as a broader process,not as a distinct break in time.… By
voting ‘no’,they [the SQS] actually have made a stronger statement,that it’s more useful
to consider a broader view — a deeper view of the Anthropocene.”
E . E L L I S , W H Y I R E S I G N E D F R O M T H E
A N T H R O P O C E N E W O R K I N G G R O U P ( 1 3 J U L Y 2 0 2 3 )
After 14 years of professional work as a member of the Anthropocene Working Group
(AWG),I’ve now tendered my formal resignation.…
Nevertheless I must resign,for two reasons.The first is that things have changed within
the group,as exemplified by the increasingly corrosive nature of discussions surrounding
two recent resignations.AWG has become so focusedon promoting a single narrow
definition of theAnthropocenethat there is no longer room for dissent or for a broader
perspective within the group.This narrowing of perspective began to emerge years ago,
with the 2016 vote deciding that only evidence supporting a mid-20th century start date
would be considered in Anthropocene definition.… But recent efforts to promote the
group’s final GSSP and site proposal have now established beyond doubt that there is no
longer any place for broader perspectives on Anthropocene definition within AWG.The
group exists only to promote one single narrow perspective,and differing views are no
longer acceptable.I clearly no longer have any useful role in the group.…
E . E L L I S , W H Y I R E S I G N E D F R O M T H E
A N T H R O P O C E N E W O R K I N G G R O U P ( 1 3 J U L Y 2 0 2 3 )
Second,it is no longer possible to avoid the reality that narrowly defining the Anthropocene
in the way AWG has chosen to do has become more than a scholarly concern.TheAWG’s
choiceto systematically ignore overwhelming evidence of Earth’s long-term anthropogenic
transformation is not just bad science,it’s bad for public understanding and action on global
change.This,at a time when broader cooperation to address these grave societal challenges is
more critical than ever.
To define the Anthropocene as a shallow band of sediment in a single lake is an esoteric
academic matter.But dividing Earth’s human transformation into two parts,pre- and post-
1950, does real damage by denying the deeper history and the ultimate causes of Earth’s
unfolding social-environmental crisis.Are the planetary changes wrought by industrial and
colonial nations before 1950 not significant enough to transform the planet? The political
ramifications of such a misleading and scientifically inaccurate portrayal are clearly profound
and regressive.PerhapsAWG’s break in Earth history will simply be ignored outside
stratigraphy.But this is undoubtedly neither AWG’s goal,nor is it the way AWG’s narrative is
being interpreted across the public media …
E . E L L I S , W H Y I R E S I G N E D F R O M T H E
A N T H R O P O C E N E W O R K I N G G R O U P ( 1 3 J U L Y 2 0 2 3 )
As a scholar who has actively worked within a group now promoting a misleading and
regressive perspective on Earth’s transformation by human societies,I feel obligated to respond.
First,by formally ending my association with the group,and in the long term,by doing my
best to counteract the damage created by this misleading perspectivebased on the best available
science.….
I remain hopeful that the Anthropocene as a concept will continue to inspireefforts to
understand and more effectively guide societal interactions with our only planet.I no longer
believe that theAWG is helping to achievethis and is increasingly actively accomplishing the
opposite.
https://anthroecology.org/why-i-resigned-from-the-anthropocene-working-group/
E . C . E L L I S , A N T H R O P O C E N E : A
V E RY S H O R T I N T R O D U C T I O N :
"Until this time, the Anthropocene happened
while we were busy making other plans.It
remains a work in progress." (2018,p. 130)