Preprint Communication Version 1 This version is not peer-reviewed

Anthropocene: To Be or not to be?

Version 1 : Received: 21 February 2020 / Approved: 23 February 2020 / Online: 23 February 2020 (10:38:38 CET)

How to cite: Santos, J.G.D. Anthropocene: To Be or not to be?. Preprints 2020, 2020020316 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202002.0316.v1). Santos, J.G.D. Anthropocene: To Be or not to be?. Preprints 2020, 2020020316 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202002.0316.v1).

Abstract

The growing interest related to the proposal of formal definition of a new geological period that has being called “Anthropocene” has introduced a buzzing dynamics in the scientific community, but its conduct is perhaps due to various interests involved in a discussion that has long surpassed the contours of the so-called “Geosciences”. Themes such as “Climate Change or Drift”, “Global Warming”, “Massive Extinction of Species” and “Loss of bio and geodiversity”, among others, are the wheel of a geomorphogenetic dynamics of anthropocentric origin, which leads the debate. But are the conditions for the formal establishment of a new morphosedimentary cycle following the Meghalayanian (Upper Holocene) Age? This work pursues a line of thought that seeks to answer these and other questions, based on the official position of the institutes that have the scientific competence for the formalization under consideration, and the formal criteria that should be considered for this purpose.

Subject Areas

Anthropocene; chronostratigraphy; stratotype; Anthropocene Working Group; International Stratigraphy Commission; International Union of Geological Sciences

Comments (0)

We encourage comments and feedback from a broad range of readers. See criteria for comments and our diversity statement.

Leave a public comment
Send a private comment to the author(s)
Views 0
Downloads 0
Comments 0
Metrics 0


×
Alerts
Notify me about updates to this article or when a peer-reviewed version is published.