Anthropocene angst: Authentic geology and stratigraphic sincerity

5Citations
Citations of this article
9Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

In March 2024, the Anthropocene Working Group’s proposal for a formal Anthropocene Series/Epoch of the Geologic Time Scale was formally rejected by the Subcommission on Quaternary Stratigraphy. What does the failed formalization effort reveal about the relationship between science and normativity under conditions of ‘climate crisis’? Drawing on four years of ethnographic observation of the Anthropocene Working Group, this article explains how the Group developed its proposal, why it failed, and what it reveals about the social construction of geological truth. The effort to formalize an Anthropocene unit was based on a coupling of science and politics, wherein geo-scientists could make normative assertions in the register of scientific fact. Ultimately, the Group failed because it was seen as appropriating incumbent geological techniques to advance claims about the future, transitioning geology from a descriptive science about the past to a site of warning.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Damianos, A. (2025). Anthropocene angst: Authentic geology and stratigraphic sincerity. Social Studies of Science, 55(3), 444–464. https://doi.org/10.1177/03063127241282309

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free