Visit our website
New America Cypbersecurity Initiative
New America Cypbersecurity Initiative
MIT Technology Review
MIT Technology Review
io9
io9
Techdirt
Techdirt
Knowledge@Wharton
Knowledge@Wharton
Bioscience Technology
Bioscience Technology
redOrbit
redOrbit
Technology & Marketing Law Blog
Technology & Marketing Law Blog
Popular Science Blog
Popular Science Blog
Pew Research Center
Pew Research Center
Genomics Law Report
Genomics Law Report
Science 2.0
Science 2.0
The Guardian Headquarters
The Guardian Headquarters
Genetic Literacy Project
Genetic Literacy Project
Disclaimer

Statements posted on this blog represent the views of individual authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the Center for Law Science & Innovation (which does not take positions on policy issues) or of the Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law or Arizona State University.

Worldwide Web Watch

WWWapril15February 10, 2016

When we hear the words “new age” we might think of music, spirituality and religious beliefs or even, perhaps, wine.  However, none of these apply to how the term is employed in Center Faculty Fellow Brad Allenby‘s article about the Anthropocene, recently published in Slate.  There, the  term “new age” reflects a proposed geological place and time: the Anthropocene.  The Anthropocene is said to have been born at that moment when man-made activity began to  leave its mark.  This unique place and time is being heralded by some as an epoch, which Allenby claims is problematic because it implies stability.  The suggested Anthropocene, follows the Holocene, a geological epoch that began 11,700 years ago.  Allenby points out that even if we are generous and set the beginning of this distinct Anthropocenic era two-hundred years ago, with the speed of human-induced global change and its impact, we should hesitate to call it a geological epoch.  To do so, is simply arrogant.  At most, humans are an “event,” states Allenby and events are not the heart and soul of an epoch, unlike stability.