Making the case for a formal Anthropocene Epoch: An analysis of ongoing critiques
Abstract
© 2017 The Authors. A range of published arguments against formalizing the Anthropocene
as a geological time unit have variously suggested that it is a misleading term of
non-stratigraphic origin and usage, is based on insignificant temporal and material
stratigraphic content unlike that used to define older geological time units, is focused
on observation of human history or speculation about the future rather than geologically
significant events, and is driven more by politics than science. In response, we contend
that the Anthropocene is a functional term that has firm geological grounding in a
well-characterized stratigraphic record. This record, although often lithologically
thin, is laterally extensive, rich in detail and already reflects substantial elapsed
(and in part irreversible) change to the Earth System that is comparable to or greater
in magnitude than that of previous epoch-scale transitions. The Anthropocene differs
from previously defined epochs in reflecting contemporary geological change, which
in turn also leads to the term's use over a wide range of social and political discourse.
Nevertheless, that use remains entirely distinct from its demonstrable stratigraphic
underpinning. Here we respond to the arguments opposing the geological validity and
utility of the Anthropocene, and submit that a strong case may be made for the Anthropocene
to be treated as a formal chronostratigraphic unit and added to the Geological Time
Scale.
Type
Journal articleSubject
Science & TechnologyPhysical Sciences
Geology
Anthropocene
Earth System
Geological Time Scale
Holocene
Stratigraphy
GLOBAL STRATOTYPE SECTION
CLIMATE SENSITIVITY
CRAWFORD LAKE
CARBON-CYCLE
ICE-CORE
BASE
STRATIGRAPHY
DEFINITION
SEDIMENTS
MARINE
Permalink
https://hdl.handle.net/10161/21240Published Version (Please cite this version)
10.1127/nos/2017/0385Publication Info
Zalasiewicz, J; Waters, CN; Wolfe, AP; Barnosky, AD; Cearreta, A; Edgeworth, M; ...
Williams, M (2017). Making the case for a formal Anthropocene Epoch: An analysis of ongoing critiques.
Newsletters on Stratigraphy, 50(2). pp. 205-226. 10.1127/nos/2017/0385. Retrieved from https://hdl.handle.net/10161/21240.This is constructed from limited available data and may be imprecise. To cite this
article, please review & use the official citation provided by the journal.
Collections
More Info
Show full item recordScholars@Duke
Peter K. Haff
Professor Emeritus
The neoenvironment is the total environment in which we live. It is the sum of the
natural, human, and technological systems and processes that surround us. It includes
for example forest ecosystems, animals and machines, nanotechnology, the internet,
highways, medical systems, power grids, human populations, political parties, governments
and bureaucracies, robots and religions and their interactions with each other. In
an age in which both the level and acceleration of techno
Daniel D. Richter
Professor in the Division of Earth and Climate Science
Richter’s research and teaching links soils with ecosystems and the wider environment,
most recently Earth scientists’ Critical Zone. He focuses on how humanity is transforming
Earth’s soils from natural to human-natural systems, specifically how land-uses alter
soil processes and properties on time scales of decades, centuries, and millennia.
Richter's book, Understanding Soil Change (Cambridge University Press), co-authored
with his former PhD
Alphabetical list of authors with Scholars@Duke profiles.

Articles written by Duke faculty are made available through the campus open access policy. For more information see: Duke Open Access Policy
Rights for Collection: Scholarly Articles
Works are deposited here by their authors, and represent their research and opinions, not that of Duke University. Some materials and descriptions may include offensive content. More info