Anthropocene Vote Fail: Why Geologists Rejected the New Epoch

For nearly 15 years, a dedicated group of scientists has argued that humanity has altered the Earth so profoundly that we have entered a new geological chapter. They called this proposed epoch the “Anthropocene.” However, in a definitive decision made in March 2024, the top governing body of geology voted down the proposal. This decision means that, officially, we are still living in the Holocene Epoch.

This rejection was not a denial of human impact on the planet. Instead, it was a technical dispute regarding how we measure geologic time. Below is a detailed breakdown of the vote, the science behind the rejected proposal, and what this means for the scientific timeline.

The Decisive Vote by the SQS

The proposal to formalize the Anthropocene was spearheaded by the Anthropocene Working Group (AWG). They submitted their recommendation to the Subcommission on Quaternary Stratigraphy (SQS). This is the body responsible for defining the current slice of Earth’s timeline.

The vote was not close. According to reports from the International Union of Geological Sciences (IUGS), the proposal was rejected with a vote of 12 against, 4 in favor, and 2 abstentions.

This decision halts the process to rewrite textbooks and museum exhibits. If the vote had passed, it would have moved up the chain to the International Commission on Stratigraphy and finally the IUGS executive committee. By stopping here, the scientific community has signaled that the criteria for a new “epoch” have not been met under the current rules of stratigraphy.

The "Golden Spike" at Crawford Lake

To define a new geological epoch, scientists must identify a “Golden Spike.” This is technically known as a Global Boundary Stratotype Section and Point (GSSP). It is a specific physical location on Earth where the rock or sediment record clearly shows the exact moment the new era began.

The AWG spent years analyzing sites around the globe. They looked at coral reefs in Australia, peat bogs in Poland, and ice cores in Antarctica. Ultimately, they selected Crawford Lake in Ontario, Canada.

Crawford Lake was chosen for the following reasons:

Distinct Layers: The lake is deep and the bottom is undisturbed. Seasonal sediments form distinct layers similar to tree rings.
The Plutonium Marker: The proposal argued that the Anthropocene began in 1952. This year marks a sharp increase in radioactive plutonium isotopes found in the sediment, a direct result of hydrogen bomb testing during the Cold War.
The Great Acceleration: The 1950s coincide with a massive global surge in population, industrialization, and fossil fuel use.

The committee argued that the plutonium fallout provided the precise global marker required to define the start of the epoch. The voters, however, disagreed that this single marker was sufficient to end the Holocene.

Why the Proposal Failed

The rejection stems from strict geological definitions rather than a disagreement about climate change. The geologists who voted “no” raised several specific technical issues with the proposal.

The Timeline was Too Short

Geological epochs usually span millions of years. The Pleistocene lasted about 2.5 million years. Even the current Holocene has lasted 11,700 years. The proposed Anthropocene would have started only 72 years ago. Many stratigraphers argued that 72 years of sediment is not enough rock record to define an epoch. It represents less than a single human lifetime, which is a blink of an eye in geological history.

Human Impact Started Earlier

Critics of the 1952 start date argued that it ignored thousands of years of human influence. Pinning the start of the “Human Epoch” to the mid-20th century excludes:

The rise of agriculture and deforestation thousands of years ago.
The Industrial Revolution in the 1800s.
The colonization of the Americas and the resulting biological exchange.

By setting the date at 1952, the proposal implied that early human impacts were geologically insignificant. Many scientists felt this was an inaccurate representation of how humans have shaped the Earth over millennia.

An “Event” vs. An “Epoch”

Several opponents of the proposal suggested that the Anthropocene should be classified as a geological “event” rather than an epoch.

In geology, an event is a significant occurrence that changes the planet but does not necessarily fit into the rigid blocks of the Geologic Time Scale. Examples include the Great Oxidation Event (when oxygen filled the atmosphere) or mass extinction events. Calling the Anthropocene an “event” allows scientists to acknowledge the massive transformation caused by humans without forcing it into a definition that requires a specific start date like 1952.

The Aftermath and Controversy

The voting process was not without internal conflict. After the initial vote in February 2024, members of the Anthropocene Working Group and the chair of the SQS, Jan Zalasiewicz, challenged the validity of the results. They claimed the voting process was rushed and that legitimate scientific debate was stifled.

However, the International Union of Geological Sciences (IUGS) reviewed the procedure and released a public statement in March 2024. They validated the vote and confirmed the rejection was final. The IUGS stated that while the Anthropocene will not be added to the official Chronostratigraphic Chart, the term will likely continue to be used in anthropology, sociology, and general conversation.

What This Means for the Holocene

For now, we officially remain in the Holocene Epoch, specifically in the Meghalayan Age. The Holocene began 11,700 years ago following the last major Ice Age. It is characterized by a stable climate that allowed human civilization to flourish.

The rejection of the Anthropocene designation maintains the stability of the Geologic Time Scale. This scale is the backbone of geology, used to date rocks and fossils globally. Changing it is a massive undertaking that requires overwhelming consensus, which the Anthropocene proposal failed to secure.

While the “Anthropocene” will not appear on official geological maps, the data collected from Crawford Lake and other sites remains valuable. It provides undeniable proof of how rapidly human activity has shifted planetary systems, specifically regarding carbon cycles, biodiversity loss, and chemical distribution.

Frequently Asked Questions

Does this vote mean geologists deny climate change? No. The geologists involved in the vote widely agree that humans are altering the climate and the planet’s surface. The dispute was purely about technical classification and whether the timeline met the strict rules for defining a new geological epoch.

Can the Anthropocene proposal be voted on again? Under current statutes, a rejected proposal typically cannot be resubmitted for ten years. However, the concept of the Anthropocene may evolve. Scientists might propose a different start date or a different classification category in the future.

Why was 1952 the proposed start date? 1952 was chosen because of the distinct radioactive signature left by hydrogen bomb testing. This radioactive plutonium spread globally and settled in sediments, creating a clear, measurable line in the rock record known as a “Golden Spike.”

What is the difference between the Holocene and the Anthropocene? The Holocene is the official current epoch, characterized by a stable climate starting 11,700 years ago. The Anthropocene is a proposed epoch defined by human activity becoming the dominant influence on climate and the environment. Since the vote failed, the Anthropocene remains an unofficial term.