The Anthropocene and the Sixth Great Extinction

[CrusaderFrank]

All we know for certain is that it killed off the Piltdown Man

 

[Sunsettommy]

Arguments for the Anthropocene​

Scientists contend that the pervasive and irreversible signatures of human activity on Earth's geology warrant recognition of new epoch of Geological Time.

Characterized by the mantra "better living through chemistry," the time immediately following the Second World War was steeped in a euphoric state of consumption of mass-manufactured materials. Following vigorous debate, scientists propose that this time should now be formally recognized as the beginning of a new epoch of geological time, the Anthropocene, based on the argument that humans have changed the Earth system significantly enough to produce distinctive stratigraphic signals that should be recognized in the Geologic Time Scale.

After reviewing the stratigraphic record of anthropogenic markers-those produced by modern human activity-an international team of scientists found that the presence of manufactured materials in sediments-including aluminum, plastics and concrete-coincides with global spikes in fallout radionuclides, particulates from fossil-fuel combustion, global atmospheric pollution and accelerated increases in greenhouse gas concentrations. This has led to a state in which the planet operates under fundamentally different boundary conditions than during the Holocene, the epoch spanning the prior 11,700 years, which served as the cradle for advanced human societies under relatively stable environmental conditions.
"This is the first proposed geological boundary that will have been witnessed directly by advanced human societies. Moreover, it is one that marks the very consequences of these societies' activities on the planet." -Alexander Wolfe
Alexander Wolfe, adjunct professor of biological sciences at the University of Alberta, is the sole Canadian co-author of the new study published in the journal Science. "This new paper is a major step before we provide evidence and recommendations to the gatekeepers of geological time, the International Commission on Stratigraphy, on whether the Anthropocene should be formally entered to the time scale as a new unit of Earth history beginning in the mid-20th century," Wolfe explains, noting the move has implications well beyond the geological community.

The increasing usage of the term "Anthropocene" has been notoriously vague and typically varies from discipline to discipline, motivating the group-including not only geologists and paleobiologists, but also anthropologists, archeologists, historians and social scientists-to settle on an agreed-upon formal definition.

"We hope that such a common definition will have ramifications well beyond the arcane rules of stratigraphy," states Wolfe, including, for example, ecology, economics, policy and the law of the sea. "In a practical sense, in the Anthropocene it can no longer be assumed that environmental conditions will be stable on generational time scales, given the wholesale changes in many key Earth parameters over recent decades."

"This is the first proposed geological boundary that will have been witnessed directly by advanced human societies," Wolfe continues. "Moreover, it is one that marks the very consequences of these societies' activities on the planet."
Though these features make the Anthopocene fundamentally different from other geological boundaries in Earth's 4.6-billion-year history, the team is nonetheless adhering strictly to the codified methodology of formal stratigraphic nomenclature.

Wolfe's participation in this monumental study is another landmark in the U of A's long-standing contributions to the science of global changes. He is hopeful of the changes the findings may inspire, particularly in the acknowledgment of humanity's appropriation of key processes at the planetary scale, for better or for worse.

"We are optimistic that this will raise awareness of the global character of human impacts on the Earth system and the way humans have and are changing the planet. Formal recognition of these changes is clearly relevant, not just to stratigraphy and geology, but also to the entire conceptualization of our collective effects on the Earth system."

Wolfe says the evidence is clear. "Formalization of the Anthropocene may well affect policy decisions concerning environmental futures. How far can we or should we go in terms of modifying the planet, our only viable home?"

The findings, "The Anthropocene is functionally and stratigraphically distinct from the Holocene," were published in the Jan. 8 issue of the journal Science.

Arguments for the Anthropocene

Scientists contend that the pervasive and irreversible signatures of human activity on Earth's geology warrant recognition of new epoch of Geological Time.

www.ualberta.ca

It was a STUPID argument because it isn't happening.

It has been voted down overwhelmingly 12-4, LINK

The CO2 increase is marvelous to the health of the planet which was pointed out by NASA 8 years ago:

Carbon Dioxide Fertilization Greening Earth, Study Finds​

From a quarter to half of Earth’s vegetated lands has shown significant greening over the last 35 years largely due to rising levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide, according to a new study published in the journal Nature Climate Change on April 25.

An international team of 32 authors from 24 institutions in eight countries led the effort, which involved using satellite data from NASA’s Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectrometer and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Advanced Very High Resolution Radiometer instruments to help determine the leaf area index, or amount of leaf cover, over the planet’s vegetated regions. The greening represents an increase in leaves on plants and trees equivalent in area to two times the continental United States.

LINK

 

[Crick]

It was a STUPID argument because it isn't happening.

It has been voted down overwhelmingly 12-4, LINK

The CO2 increase is marvelous to the health of the planet which was pointed out by NASA 8 years ago:

Carbon Dioxide Fertilization Greening Earth, Study Finds​

From a quarter to half of Earth’s vegetated lands has shown significant greening over the last 35 years largely due to rising levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide, according to a new study published in the journal Nature Climate Change on April 25.

An international team of 32 authors from 24 institutions in eight countries led the effort, which involved using satellite data from NASA’s Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectrometer and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Advanced Very High Resolution Radiometer instruments to help determine the leaf area index, or amount of leaf cover, over the planet’s vegetated regions. The greening represents an increase in leaves on plants and trees equivalent in area to two times the continental United States.

LINK

Your post here tells us nothing about whether or not humans are making significant changes to the planet and whether or not the period deserves or has already attained a name. The IUGN is in fact the organzation in charge of stratigraphic nomenclature but, unfortunately for you, they have no control over common language and "Anthropocene" is here to stay.

The most critical component of the many changes that led scientists to identify the period as Anthropocene was the massive numbers of extinctions taking place, almost all of which are due to human influences. Do you see any significance to extinction rates thousands of times higher than the background rate?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

It was a STUPID argument because it isn't happening.

It has been voted down overwhelmingly 12-4, LINK

The CO2 increase is marvelous to the health of the planet which was pointed out by NASA 8 years ago:

Carbon Dioxide Fertilization Greening Earth, Study Finds​

From a quarter to half of Earth’s vegetated lands has shown significant greening over the last 35 years largely due to rising levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide, according to a new study published in the journal Nature Climate Change on April 25.

An international team of 32 authors from 24 institutions in eight countries led the effort, which involved using satellite data from NASA’s Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectrometer and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Advanced Very High Resolution Radiometer instruments to help determine the leaf area index, or amount of leaf cover, over the planet’s vegetated regions. The greening represents an increase in leaves on plants and trees equivalent in area to two times the continental United States.

LINK

Also, the Moana Loa CO2 readings from 2020 to 2022 showed that shutting the world economy for 2 years had no effect whatsoever

 

[ReinyDays]

You mislead and lie a lot!

Ask her to convert Fahrenheit to Celsius ... I need a good belly laugh this morning ...

 

[fncceo]

The Anthropocene and the Sixth Great Extinction​

Stop ... you're scaring the women ...

 

[ReinyDays]

Also, the Moana Loa CO2 readings from 2020 to 2022 showed that shutting the world economy for 2 years had no effect whatsoever

Didn't she erupt during that time frame? ...

 

[Sunsettommy]

Your post here tells us nothing about whether or not humans are making significant changes to the planet and whether or not the period deserves or has already attained a name. The IUGN is in fact the organzation in charge of stratigraphic nomenclature but, unfortunately for you, they have no control over common language and "Anthropocene" is here to stay.

The most critical component of the many changes that led scientists to identify the period as Anthropocene was the massive numbers of extinctions taking place, almost all of which are due to human influences. Do you see any significance to extinction rates thousands of times higher than the background rate?

Get over it!

It is settled by the group that has the power to make such decision.

12-4 is the decision.

 

[Crick]

Get over it!

It is settled by the group that has the power to make such decision.

12-4 is the decision.

Do you or do you not accept that the massive extinction rate currently taking place has significance?

 

[Sunsettommy]

Do you or do you not accept that the massive extinction rate currently taking place has significance?

LOL, it appears you finally realize the dumb "Anthropocene" idea has been voted out of existence.

You can't lie on this either since I go by the official group that monitors Extinction rate:

Then here is this published paper with many internal links to other published papers on this topic:

Historical bird and terrestrial mammal extinction rates and causes​

LINK


You sure lie a lot!

 

[Crick]

LOL, it appears you finally realize the dumb "Anthropocene" idea has been voted out of existence.

You can't lie on this either since I go by the official group that monitors Extinction rate:

View attachment 930296

Then here is this published paper with many internal links to other published papers on this topic:

Historical bird and terrestrial mammal extinction rates and causes​

LINK


You sure lie a lot!

You displayed a graph that claims to be from the IUCN's website. You do NOT provide a working link. If I type in the URL your graph provides it takes me here:

The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species

Established in 1964, the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species has evolved to become the world’s most comprehensive information source on the global conservation status of animal, fungi and plant species.

www.iucnredlist.org

Feel free to search this location for your graphic.

When I go to the IUCN's website, I find data like these at the URL provided at the bottom. Note that every threatened category has increased multifold in less than 30 years. How do you reconcile that against the data you displayed?

The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species

Established in 1964, the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species has evolved to become the world’s most comprehensive information source on the global conservation status of animal, fungi and plant species.

www.iucnredlist.org

So, where did your graph come from? Google shows it coming from Quora with the same non-working image of an URL.

I suspect that you have lied to us while accusing me of lying. Prove me wrong. Show us a working link to that graph at the IUCN website.

 

[Crick]

You can't even accept the legal process that determines the decision on proposals in the organization,

View attachment 929993


The Anthropocene was overwhelmingly voted down by the Subcomission on Quaternary Stratigraphy…



Despite losing by a 12-4 margin in the SQS, the AWG challenged the vote and the IUGS told them to pound sand.



More in the link with links to the official website and Nature source

LINK

It was overwhelmingly voted NO as 12-4 shows.

You mislead and lie a lot!

I have never challenged and fully accept the IUGS's authority over stratigraphic nomenclature. That, however, will not stop the general public non-geologists and some geologists from continuing to use the term. Nor will it have any effect on the sixth great extinction event, currently underway.

 

[ding]

SF Table 7.2. Table of mass extinction events by date and their possible causes

Date	Event Name	Level of Extinction	Possible Cause
0.01 mya	Quaternary	55% of large mammal genera	End of ice age, hunting by early humans
66 mya	Cretaceous-Paleogene	17% of families, including dinosaurs; 50% of genera; end of Age of Reptiles	Asteroid impact, volcanic eruption
205 mya	Triassic-Jurassic	23% of families; 48% of genera	Breakup of Pangaea, extensive volcanic eruptions
252 mya	Permian-Triassic	70% of all land species; 80-96% of marine species; end of Paleozoic era	Formation of Pangea leading to depletion of shallow seas, volcanic eruptions, glaciation
345 mya	Late Devonian	19% of families, 50% of genera	Glaciation, meteor impact
450 mya	Ordovician-Silurian	25% of families, 57% of genera	Glaciation, causing changes in sea level

https://manoa.hawaii.edu/exploringourfluidearth/physical/ocean-floor/change-over-time/compare-contrast-connect-mass-extinctions-earth-s-history

Looks like glaciation was the culprit in 3 out of 6.

 

[Crick]

LOL, it appears you finally realize the dumb "Anthropocene" idea has been voted out of existence.

You can't lie on this either since I go by the official group that monitors Extinction rate:

View attachment 930296

Then here is this published paper with many internal links to other published papers on this topic:

Historical bird and terrestrial mammal extinction rates and causes​

LINK


You sure lie a lot!

I would still very much like to know where you got that graphic.

 

[Sunsettommy]

I would still very much like to know where you got that graphic.

Sigh you sure can't read since the chart clearly states Red list All Extinct Species by Decade 1870-2009

What you posted was different it was about various level of species being Vulnerable, Endangered, Critically Endangered status I wonder if you have been drinking a lot today.

I posted a paper with over two dozen additional papers covering the topic which you seem to have ignored Lazy are you?

The Sixth extinction wave claim is hilarious garbage since even the IUCN website database only shows 529 species went extinct since 1500 the article below show how they are creating a bogus claim as it is based on modeling scenarios.

Mass extinction lie exposed: life is thriving​

LINK

You need to read better.

 

[Crick]

Sigh you sure can't read since the chart clearly states Red list All Extinct Species by Decade 1870-2009

What you posted was different it was about various level of species being Vulnerable, Endangered, Critically Endangered status I wonder if you have been drinking a lot today.

I posted a paper with over two dozen additional papers covering the topic which you seem to have ignored Lazy are you?

The Sixth extinction wave claim is hilarious garbage since even the IUCN website database only shows 529 species went extinct since 1500 the article below show how they are creating a bogus claim as it is based on modeling scenarios.

Mass extinction lie exposed: life is thriving​

LINK

You need to read better.

Your unnamed LINK leads us to Mass extinction lie exposed: life is thriving - CO2 Coalition. Not quite to the IUCN.

What I would like is for you to provide a working link to your initial graphic, the one that CLAIMS to be from IUCNREDLIST.ORG that actually shows us that graph on their website, because I think you're LYING.

But imagine what an idiot I'll look if you succeed!

 

[Crick]

I found the actual source of your graph. Odd that I should beat you to it, don't you think.

Want mass extinctions? Enact Greta Thunberg's vision

On September 23, an irate 16-year-old Swedish girl told the United Nations General Assembly that her elders are failing to address the supposed dangers of climate change. Greta Thunberg had arrived in New York the previous week, ironically...

www.americanthinker.com

https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Rise-in-human-population-and-extinction-of-species-between-1800-and-2030_fig1_276104801

EO Indexes: Extinction | Earth.Org

EO Indexes bring you the latest on key planetary health indicators. This article covers rising extinction rates and what this means for us.

earth.org

Biodiversity: Almost half of animals in decline, research shows

A study led by Queen's University Belfast finds 48% of species are undergoing population declines.

www.bbc.com