... leaving aside the fact that 10,000 years is too short to be called an epoch, there's the question of where you set the start of the Anthropocene Era's start. Bear in mind that civilization (agriculture, the creation of cities, nations, war, etc.) began almost immediately after the end of the Ice Age, and mankind was manipulating (and trashing) its environment even before then. Desertification began in Africa because of a combination of natural climate change and human primitive agriculture; the process was actually documented, to some extent, in India within the past two millenia, as fertile lands became sandy wastes.
This proposal smacks too much of the Strong Anthropic Principle: making man seem like the most important thing in the universe, and making now seem more important than then. Junk science.
On the other hand, our effect just on what goes into and out of rivers is making a significant impact on the shape of the terrain. And it's hard to dispute that humanity has a BIG impact on the planet...exactly how big is up for grabs, but things like the BosWash corridor or visible-from-orbit agriculture are definitely alterations in the planet. Are humans as big a deal as, say, the evolution of flowering plants? Probably not, but we're not too many orders of magnitude behind.
Sure, if we suddenly vanished, most aboveground signs of our presence would be gone in 10000 years or so, but it's not like it's patently obvious that the dinosaurs ever existed either...you have to dig a bit.
Now I just want to write a dumb song to the tune of TV killed the Radio Show, except it will be humans and the Holocene.
Though I don't quite get what the issue is with the Epoch...sure, I could see the world changes as sliding into another era, but the amount of change they speak of is actually far less then what was seen between the Triassic and Jurassic boundaries. A heck of a lot less then between Jurassic and Cretaceous....
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
This proposal smacks too much of the Strong Anthropic Principle: making man seem like the most important thing in the universe, and making now seem more important than then. Junk science.
no subject
Sure, if we suddenly vanished, most aboveground signs of our presence would be gone in 10000 years or so, but it's not like it's patently obvious that the dinosaurs ever existed either...you have to dig a bit.
no subject
Now, maybe renaming it, but there are lots of signs that human activities 10k years ago had big impacts, too.
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
Though I don't quite get what the issue is with the Epoch...sure, I could see the world changes as sliding into another era, but the amount of change they speak of is actually far less then what was seen between the Triassic and Jurassic boundaries. A heck of a lot less then between Jurassic and Cretaceous....
no subject
dvandom get the nomination for
Re: dvandom get the nomination for
no subject