The Fort Worth Press - No 'human era' in Earth's geological history, scientists say

USD -
AED 3.672991
AFN 65.000219
ALL 81.750787
AMD 378.259749
ANG 1.79008
AOA 917.000322
ARS 1447.487701
AUD 1.43303
AWG 1.8025
AZN 1.700263
BAM 1.65515
BBD 2.013067
BDT 122.134821
BGN 1.67937
BHD 0.376994
BIF 2949.955359
BMD 1
BND 1.271532
BOB 6.906503
BRL 5.2577
BSD 0.999467
BTN 90.452257
BWP 13.162215
BYN 2.854157
BYR 19600
BZD 2.010138
CAD 1.367585
CDF 2199.999709
CHF 0.77668
CLF 0.021767
CLP 859.060427
CNY 6.938202
CNH 6.94274
COP 3628.74
CRC 495.478914
CUC 1
CUP 26.5
CVE 93.31088
CZK 20.665802
DJF 177.720242
DKK 6.328975
DOP 62.700992
DZD 129.732318
EGP 46.901199
ERN 15
ETB 154.846992
EUR 0.84762
FJD 2.2071
FKP 0.729917
GBP 0.732865
GEL 2.694999
GGP 0.729917
GHS 10.974578
GIP 0.729917
GMD 72.999744
GNF 8771.298855
GTQ 7.666172
GYD 209.107681
HKD 7.81225
HNL 26.40652
HRK 6.386302
HTG 131.004367
HUF 321.868003
IDR 16794.85
ILS 3.094805
IMP 0.729917
INR 90.44665
IQD 1309.366643
IRR 42125.000158
ISK 122.73999
JEP 0.729917
JMD 156.730659
JOD 0.709013
JPY 156.675501
KES 128.949686
KGS 87.450254
KHR 4034.223621
KMF 417.999729
KPW 899.945137
KRW 1460.14997
KWD 0.30731
KYD 0.83291
KZT 496.518171
LAK 21498.933685
LBP 89504.332961
LKR 309.337937
LRD 185.901857
LSL 15.973208
LTL 2.95274
LVL 0.60489
LYD 6.316351
MAD 9.162679
MDL 16.911242
MGA 4427.744491
MKD 52.240134
MMK 2099.936125
MNT 3569.846682
MOP 8.043143
MRU 39.687396
MUR 45.879977
MVR 15.449775
MWK 1732.791809
MXN 17.344215
MYR 3.93203
MZN 63.750183
NAD 15.973816
NGN 1368.559867
NIO 36.779547
NOK 9.682405
NPR 144.74967
NZD 1.669215
OMR 0.384497
PAB 0.999458
PEN 3.359892
PGK 4.282021
PHP 58.974975
PKR 279.546749
PLN 3.57536
PYG 6615.13009
QAR 3.645472
RON 4.317897
RSD 99.504971
RUB 76.255212
RWF 1458.735317
SAR 3.750238
SBD 8.058101
SCR 13.714455
SDG 601.523681
SEK 8.99609
SGD 1.273145
SHP 0.750259
SLE 24.475007
SLL 20969.499267
SOS 570.224434
SRD 37.894025
STD 20697.981008
STN 20.734071
SVC 8.745065
SYP 11059.574895
SZL 15.972716
THB 31.747042
TJS 9.340239
TMT 3.51
TND 2.890703
TOP 2.40776
TRY 43.52501
TTD 6.770395
TWD 31.644498
TZS 2580.289759
UAH 43.116413
UGX 3558.598395
UYU 38.520938
UZS 12251.99609
VES 371.640565
VND 25982
VUV 119.556789
WST 2.72617
XAF 555.124234
XAG 0.011742
XAU 0.000204
XCD 2.70255
XCG 1.80131
XDR 0.68948
XOF 555.135979
XPF 100.927097
YER 238.374993
ZAR 16.12195
ZMK 9001.208602
ZMW 19.565181
ZWL 321.999592
  • SCS

    0.0200

    16.14

    +0.12%

  • RYCEF

    -0.3200

    16.68

    -1.92%

  • RBGPF

    0.1000

    82.5

    +0.12%

  • CMSD

    -0.0700

    23.87

    -0.29%

  • BCC

    5.3000

    90.23

    +5.87%

  • RIO

    0.1100

    96.48

    +0.11%

  • GSK

    3.8900

    57.23

    +6.8%

  • CMSC

    -0.0400

    23.62

    -0.17%

  • BCE

    0.2400

    26.34

    +0.91%

  • NGG

    1.5600

    87.79

    +1.78%

  • JRI

    0.0300

    13.15

    +0.23%

  • VOD

    0.4600

    15.71

    +2.93%

  • RELX

    -0.7300

    29.78

    -2.45%

  • AZN

    3.1300

    187.45

    +1.67%

  • BTI

    -0.2400

    61.63

    -0.39%

  • BP

    0.3800

    39.2

    +0.97%

No 'human era' in Earth's geological history, scientists say
No 'human era' in Earth's geological history, scientists say / Photo: © AFP

No 'human era' in Earth's geological history, scientists say

A top panel of geologists has decided not to grant the 'human age' its own distinct place in Earth's geological timeline after disagreeing over when exactly our era might have begun.

Text size:

After 15 years of deliberation, a team of scientists made the case that humankind has so fundamentally altered the natural world that a new phase of Earth's existence -- a new epoch -- has already begun.

Soaring greenhouse gases, the spread of microplastics, decimation of other species, and fallout from nuclear tests -- all were submitted as evidence that the world entered the Anthropocene, or era of humans, in the mid-20th century.

But the proposal was rejected in a contentious vote that has been upheld by the International Union of Geological Sciences, the field's governing body said in a statement published on its website on Thursday.

The decision "to reject the proposal for an Anthropocene Epoch as a formal unit of the Geologic Time Scale is approved", it said.

There is no avenue for appeal, though some involved in the voting committee have raised allegations over the conduct of the ballot and a perceived lack of due process.

The union denied these assertions and called the outcome "a decisive rejection of the Anthropocene proposal" by the field's pre-eminent experts.

There were four votes in favour, 12 against and three abstentions, it added.

Despite this, the Anthropocene would endure as a widely used term: "It will remain an invaluable descriptor of human impact on the Earth system," the union said.

- 'Missed opportunity' -

In 2009 scientists began an enquiry that ultimately concluded that the Holocene epoch -- which began 11,700 years ago as the last ice age ended -- gave way to the Anthropocene around 1950.

They gathered a trove of evidence to show this, including traces of radioactive material found in the layered sediment of lakes, the global upheaval of plants and animals, and omnipresent "forever chemicals".

But opponents argued mankind had been reshaping the planet long before the 1950s, pointing to defining moments like the advent of farming and the industrial revolution.

Martin Head, who was part of the team that advocated for the Anthropocene, said there was "a myriad of geological signals" and lamented the way the process was handled.

"I feel this has been a missed opportunity to recognise and endorse a simple reality, that our planet left its natural functioning state in the mid-20th century," Head, a professor of earth sciences at Brock University in Canada, told AFP.

There was no disagreement that 'the age of man' had resulted in profound planetary changes, said Erle Ellis, an environmental scientist critical of the Anthropocene proposal.

But scientists weren't convinced this impact represented an epoch, no less one that definitively began only seven decades ago, said Ellis, professor of geography and environmental systems at the University of Maryland.

"The truth is, there was never a need for a firm boundary. It just wasn't the critical thing," he told AFP earlier this month after the proposal was first voted down.

W.Matthews--TFWP