Dawn of the Anthropocene?

The "age of humans" era seems a little pompous to me. What marked the start of this age? If the implication is that global warming ushered in this age, why is this warming period different than any other. It seems to me that Mr. Crutzen is flying his Nobel Peace Prize on some political winds.

We humans, although different from other species, are still a given species living in an era that has not yet completed. While we don't know what will cause the next demarcation (and may never know as we may be consumed by the event), it is very obvious to the feeblest of minds that the creation of dams and I-Pods are not that event.

Besides, beavers built dams, cattle and termites elevated green house gasses and what about that platypus? All way before "intelligent" man.

Within the link, looking at the proposition;

"If alien geologists were to visit our planet 10 million years from now, would they discern a distinct human fingerprint in Earth's accumulating layers of rock and sediment?"

I would think yes. Compared to the impact of other species, Man is well above in altering the planet and biosphere.

The question may be, in the minds of said alien geologists; can such an impact equate with such transient existence? Or they will ascribe Anthropocene a period of several times the dinosaurs.

I think that the sudden reduction in species is sufficient to define this new epoch.

The earth has always lost species, mebbe 90% of all are now extinct.

" Can't blame me for all dem dead ones, I only shot one in the face", D. Cheney

Debitage!!!

Silly.

The earth will be fine. How about the, "Age of Human Self Destruction", because for humans, enough is never enough.

I wonder how much money this person has invested in the global carbon exchange that so many are trying to bring about, and the billions of dollars that a relative few stand to make from it.

http://tapespace.com/view/Life_After_Humans

Like kramarat, I am skeptical of bilge like this, I know, kramarat didn't use that term, I did. It's just that people have a tendancy to think that our earth is fragile, and big, bad "man" will break it.

The earth is a speck in the whole of the universe and mankind won't wreck it or bring it to the point of destruction, we're not that powerful in relationship to nature. To get a little perspective of our (earth's) place in the universe check out Louie Giglio's "Indiscribable".

A single major volcanic eruption will put more debris and pollution in the air than man can do in a very long time; there is a continuous flow of oil from the seabed. This earth was designed by a Creator with the ability and capability to handle things that happen to it, naturally or man-caused.

That isn't to say that we can/should do anything we want without giving thought to the consequences, we have been tasked to be stewards of what was created. It is our job as mankind to take care of it responsibly. Part of that stewardship is to keep things in proper perspective where man is the final arbiter and not some plant/animal or fish, etc.

"Stewardship"? I wonder.

I imagine the Aliens debate will be on "How on Earth did Man get rid of all that fossil fuel in just a few hundred years?"

One camp would be arguing "they can't possibly have attained sentience, or they would have realized what Finite meant and moderated their greed and put alternates in place"

The other arguing that "the smears of iron oxide and cement dust indicate some form of building culture existed - probably a primitive religion worshiping 'Money Gods'''

It's never been a question of Man destroying Earth. It's a question of Man destroying a Man compatible climate.

It's that climate that is the 'split second' window in Earth time. One should be trying to lengthen it - not shorten it.

Being a "steward" of something doesn't mean you don't make use of that item that you have been entrusted with. It just means you will take care of it for the betterment of the one who entrusted you with that item. You're right when you raise the issue of some people not being very good stewards of this place we call Earth. There are people who use and abuse what is here without regard for the next person that comes along (just look at all the trash along roadways, or government beauracrats who pass laws that keep people from being good stewards, in order to protect some spotted owl, snail darter or whatever), or the environment.

"I imagine the Aliens debate will be on "How on Earth did Man get rid of all that fossil fuel in just a few hundred years?" We haven't even come close to exhausting all the fossil fuel. And even if we do, what difference does it make? It doesn't provide any value in ground being unused. That's why engineers and scientists are always looking for new ways to do things. They are using their God-given abilities to search for new technologies to further enhance our way of life.

There are numerous scientists that hold to the view that we can have very little, if any, impact on the temperatures or environmental conditions. We aren't that significant in the big scheme of things of nature and our universe. There are cycles of weather/environmental conditions that we can't affect one way or the other. Some scheme of "a primitive religion worshiping 'Money Gods'' to sell carbon credits, or some other farcical plan that will have zero effect on the weather conditions we experience is where GREED comes in.

"And even if we do, what difference does it make?"

That it was sequestered enabled a Man compatible climate to evolve. On pure logic reversing that sequestration is highly probable to result in one that is not.

I'm not suggesting, as some have done, a return to a Jurassic climate; just a new one that we will not like much.

It doesn't provide any value in ground being unused" Value?

The earth we inhabit was created for us to coexist with and for mankinds benefit. Man is the crowning part of creation. If someone believes that we and everything we see just evolved, then there is nothing special about man. He is the same as ever other amoeba or brussel sprout that is here and is therefore not entitled to any special treatment. That isn't the case though, man is superior to everything else, not because it has mutated farther but because he was created as such.

Resources (oil resources, etc.) aren't "sequestered" so they stay unused, they have developed that way naturally in the conditions that were right for their development (organic material, heat, pressure, etc.). They are there for us to use, not abuse and waste though.

"it has nothing to do with saving the planet..................it has to do with saving us"

Nicely said

Have GA

And it is a 'waste issue' with average useful energy yield around 14% - which is about current PV yield.

If they do this they could get down the road some day and realize they've made a big mistake.

I'm with the crowd that thinks humans have been here for a long time, and have had great impacts on the planet into what is normally considered to be our geologic past.

If science ever manages to figure out that this is the case, giving us "credit" for messing up the planet in only relatively recent times could be seen as a major error.

I think when it's time to really start a new epoch, it'll be glaringly obvious.

Just like every other living thing on Earth, we are here to perpetuate our species.

Sorrowfully, we seem to be doing it at the cost of a lot of other species...and yes, species have been disappearing for eons, usually because something ate them all or ate too much of their food or poisoned them.

That makes us little different from every other species that has come and gone.

We're just better tool makers. What we need to work on is becoming better tool users.