@moonbus saidI actually had a similar thought, that this particular "epoch" started around the industrial revolution. Once commercial airlines became a mainstay, this epoch was in full swing.
@shavixmir
The delimiting point when the anthropocene started is somewhat arbitrary. Certainly the evidence in the mud at the bottom of Lake Crawford is evidence of massive interference in nature by mankind, but I would contend that that started a long time ago. Roughly, when mankind stopped being primarily a hunter-gather and became a settled farmer. This markedly changed ...[text shortened]... cataclysmic delimiter, geologically, but it wasn't the first. That's my point.
Good topic, shav.
The last 100 years have been drastically different from any other era on earth when humans were around, and so much more impactful on the environment.
@shavixmir saidI'll look into it and get back to you on this. As I said before, somewhat arbitrary. Biologically/zoologically speaking, the big one was the so-called Cambrian Explosion -- google that. More to follow.
Do you know, from the other ages, what some of the defining factors were, that they created a new age?
Things like no more dinosaurs? The bronze age?
1 edit
@vivify saidAgreed, re Industrial Revolution. Coal dust besmirches the arctic ice; this has been verified by taking deep cores.
I actually had a similar thought, that this particular "epoch" started around the industrial revolution. Once commercial airlines became a mainstay, this epoch was in full swing.
The last 100 years have been drastically different from any other era on earth when humans were around, and so much more impactful on the environment.
Another indicator is the explosive growth in the human population over the last 100 yrs, and concurrent drop in natural diversity in the biosphere generally. The drop in infant mortality and the invention/discovery of antibiotics were crucial factors in the human population growth of the last 100 yrs. Most of the casualties in the American Civil War died for lack of penicillin and antiseptics, and many more soldiers than civilians died in WWI; they died of their wounds, also for lack of antibiotics. Penicillin was discovered (by accident) in 1928 and has contributed immeasurably to human population growth -- but also, one might add, to the 'unnatural selection' of resistant strains; this too will leave a geological trace long after we have disappeared.
https://ourworldindata.org/world-population-growth-past-future
1 edit
@shavixmir saidNo, not a good basis.
Say what?
This is dead interesting. With a debate point at the end.
These are the ages we've had (the age of Aquarius doesn't seem to be officially amongst them):
https://stratigraphy.org/ICSchart/ChronostratChart2023-06.pdf
Things, like the Jurassic Age, etc.
So, how are these ages decided? Well, there's an International Commission on Stratigraphy (that pr ...[text shortened]... ng, is a new age, based on humanity's footprint on the planet, a good basis for a new epoch and age?
We are not the only species capable of terraforming. Obviously there was a lot of change caused by the little critters that took over the planet, then died and made all the oil, but we didn't name an epoch after them.
The presence of wolves in environments actually changes the route of rivers through mountains. American bison were also terraformers who devastated prior ecosystems, altered soil chemistry, and perhaps even changing climate and weather patterns.
Conservatives need to stop being so defensive in this. Of course we're changing things. Things change. These changes are not necessarily bad, but some of them are and we should address those things like rising temperatures.
@moonbus saidWho could have known we were headed for yet another global fry scare thread again. Sooooo predictable. Shag ‘bumblefok’ doody and his jself deprecating ‘who, me?’ OP. Soooo obvious.
Agreed, re Industrial Revolution. Coal dust besmirches the arctic ice; this has been verified by taking deep cores.
Another indicator is the explosive growth in the human population over the last 100 yrs, and concurrent drop in natural diversity in the biosphere generally. The drop in infant mortality and the invention/discovery of antibiotics were crucial factors in the h ...[text shortened]... long after we have disappeared.
https://ourworldindata.org/world-population-growth-past-future
@moonbus saidWell, yes. I read up a bit about the first fossils coming from the Cambrian age.
I'll look into it and get back to you on this. As I said before, somewhat arbitrary. Biologically/zoologically speaking, the big one was the so-called Cambrian Explosion -- google that. More to follow.
That’s a big thing.
And I guess dinosaurs are another big thing.
The last ice age seems like a big thing.
But isn’t our footprint on the Earth much smaller than these events?
It seems to me more fitting in the row of stone age, bronze age, iron age, industrial revolution, communication revolution, nuclear age, digital age, etc.
But, these scientists seem to think the changes in the mud in this Canadian lake are more like the changes from the ice age to our current age.
I don’t know. Do you think we’re in a new age, like Stage 10 in the Cambrian period?
See. I don’t know how big this Stage 10 is. I mean, they just gave it a stage number instead of some fancy sounding name.
@moonbus said“Fowl” so spelt.
@shavixmir
The delimiting point when the anthropocene started is somewhat arbitrary. Certainly the evidence in the mud at the bottom of Lake Crawford is evidence of massive interference in nature by mankind, but I would contend that that started a long time ago. Roughly, when mankind stopped being primarily a hunter-gather and became a settled farmer. This markedly changed ...[text shortened]... cataclysmic delimiter, geologically, but it wasn't the first. That's my point.
Good topic, shav.
Courtesy of the Spelling Stasi.
😆
1 edit
@shavixmir saidHumans are causing a massive decrease in biodiversity world wide. Coral reefs are dying, widespread deforestation, etc. We not only remove habitats which existed for hundreds of millions of years, but this irreversibly alters the environment. Once you cut down a tropical rain forest and plant crops there, you change the soil chemistry and local climate such that a tropical forest wouldn’t grow there even if you tried to reseed one. we’ve basically caused a near-mass extinction event. So, yes, it’s a big thing and deserves its own name.
Well, yes. I read up a bit about the first fossils coming from the Cambrian age.
That’s a big thing.
And I guess dinosaurs are another big thing.
The last ice age seems like a big thing.
But isn’t our footprint on the Earth much smaller than these events?
It seems to me more fitting in the row of stone age, bronze age, iron age, industrial revolution, communication ...[text shortened]... big this Stage 10 is. I mean, they just gave it a stage number instead of some fancy sounding name.
@moonbus saidI can get behind your explanation.
Humans are causing a massive decrease in biodiversity world wide. Coral reefs are dying, widespread deforestation, etc. We not only remove habitats which existed for hundreds of millions of years, but this irreversibly alters the environment. Once you cut down a tropical rain forest and plant crops there, you change the soil chemistry and local climate such that a tropical fo ...[text shortened]... basically caused a near-mass extinction event. So, yes, it’s a big thing and deserves its own name.
It will suck in the future though. Oh, yeah, the Crawfordian age.... when mankind did to itself what it took asteroids to do to the dinosaurs.
Jeez.
1 edit
@shavixmir saidYup. This is why I am very much in favour of absolutely preventing modern humans, especially Evangelicals, from making contact with (and thereby corrupting) what few aboriginal tribes still exist (such as Andaman Islanders). The ones who can survive without technology may well be h. saps' best hope for continued survival when the electricity stops. And it will, someday.
I can get behind your explanation.
It will suck in the future though. Oh, yeah, the Crawfordian age.... when mankind did to itself what it took asteroids to do to the dinosaurs.
Jeez.
EDIT:
There is nothing special about us, you know. As Nietzsche said somewhere, 'consciousness may be an evolutionary experiment which fails.' We replaced several closely related species of hominids, and we ourselves could easily be replaced by another. See for example:
https://edition.cnn.com/2023/08/10/asia/ancient-skull-china-human-evolution-intl-scli-scn/index.html
1 edit
@shavixmir saidI’m sure this was announced a couple of years ago, really gobsmacking that we’ve had an epoch named after us, we must be really ‘special’.
I suggest sticking to the OP.
Because it is an incredible topic.
Something I had heard absolutely nothing at all about until... well... until today.
Obviously I'd heard of Jurassic, something to do with T-rex's and frogs and Aquarius (hippies), but how, what and why? Never in my life.
So, I suggest the OP stands. and we discard the little tift between Wayoma and myself.