The Anthropocene
Soooooo I haven't posted anything proper since I started this and I'm still unsure of how to do the whole blogging thing so bare with. Enjoy this post about the age of humanity. I think this is gonna be my theme for a while since it's actually really interesting.
The term "Anthropocene" is one which is fairly new to me. It's a term which is used to define the current epoch of humanity, however where the Anthropocene starts is still a debated topic. Some believe it starts at the dawn of the Industrial Revolution - when humanity first began to do the bulk of it's damage. However some argue that the age of humans should begin when humans first stepped out of their caves and started to colonise the world. I personally believe that both definitions are true, but if we're looking at the Anthropocene as the time in which humans altered the geological footprint of earth, then it begins with the construction of large cities and accelerates in the industrial revolution.
In Gaia Vince's "Adventures in the Anthropocene", she emphasises how the existence of an age of humans has resulted in a lost connection with the natural world through city living and deliberate destruction. However she also explores the stories of people living in isolated and challenging regions of the world, where humanity has managed to overcome the barriers of harsh environments. This is made possible by working alongside nature and cooperating with people using methods such as social media, radio, government grants and, most essentially, education. Some of the most compelling stories are also some of the most seemingly absurd, such as two men in the Andes painting their mountaintop white to try and bring back the glaciers that they lost to global warming (and it worked!). The reason the glaciers are so important to mountain villages is that the meltwater from them provides their main water supply during the warmer months and without this crucial water supply, their harvests would fail and the livestock would die. Necessity really is the mother of invention and this is never clearer than when looking at communities living in extreme conditions.
To me, the definition of the Anthropocene would be that it is an epoch that defines the great successes of humankind and the ways in which our intimate understanding of this planet has enabled us to alter it to aid our survival. It is a time in which we have ended diseases, used charity to ease the impacts of war and famine, and the way we have improved communications to be able to allow fast and reliable aid to those suffering the repercussions of natural and human disaster. It is however, also a time in which we have created extinctions, mass pollution, war, punched a hole in the ozone layer and allowed inequality on a hideous scale. It is my personal opinion that as as a species we have gone too far and overpopulated our home, and I have to agree with Sir David Attenborough in saying that as a species, we are victims of our own success. However this doesn't mean we cannot recover.
With the occurrence of Coronavirus, it's becoming apparent that although times are difficult, we are in fact capable of cutting down on the things we once thought were essential. We're struggling, but we're still able to carry on and remain positive. This goes to show that thanks to the changes in convenient living that have come about in the anthropocene such as WiFi, extensive road networks, large supermarkets, online shopping and healthcare, we are capable of surviving in harsh times. If we can make these changes for a global pandemic, why not for a global climate emergency? Why not for a mass extinction of valuable wildlife? Humans are an incredible species. We did not survive by being the strongest or the fastest; we survived by being the most adaptable and we're proving that fact at this very moment.
Thanks for reading (if anyone did lol)
The term "Anthropocene" is one which is fairly new to me. It's a term which is used to define the current epoch of humanity, however where the Anthropocene starts is still a debated topic. Some believe it starts at the dawn of the Industrial Revolution - when humanity first began to do the bulk of it's damage. However some argue that the age of humans should begin when humans first stepped out of their caves and started to colonise the world. I personally believe that both definitions are true, but if we're looking at the Anthropocene as the time in which humans altered the geological footprint of earth, then it begins with the construction of large cities and accelerates in the industrial revolution.
In Gaia Vince's "Adventures in the Anthropocene", she emphasises how the existence of an age of humans has resulted in a lost connection with the natural world through city living and deliberate destruction. However she also explores the stories of people living in isolated and challenging regions of the world, where humanity has managed to overcome the barriers of harsh environments. This is made possible by working alongside nature and cooperating with people using methods such as social media, radio, government grants and, most essentially, education. Some of the most compelling stories are also some of the most seemingly absurd, such as two men in the Andes painting their mountaintop white to try and bring back the glaciers that they lost to global warming (and it worked!). The reason the glaciers are so important to mountain villages is that the meltwater from them provides their main water supply during the warmer months and without this crucial water supply, their harvests would fail and the livestock would die. Necessity really is the mother of invention and this is never clearer than when looking at communities living in extreme conditions.
To me, the definition of the Anthropocene would be that it is an epoch that defines the great successes of humankind and the ways in which our intimate understanding of this planet has enabled us to alter it to aid our survival. It is a time in which we have ended diseases, used charity to ease the impacts of war and famine, and the way we have improved communications to be able to allow fast and reliable aid to those suffering the repercussions of natural and human disaster. It is however, also a time in which we have created extinctions, mass pollution, war, punched a hole in the ozone layer and allowed inequality on a hideous scale. It is my personal opinion that as as a species we have gone too far and overpopulated our home, and I have to agree with Sir David Attenborough in saying that as a species, we are victims of our own success. However this doesn't mean we cannot recover.
With the occurrence of Coronavirus, it's becoming apparent that although times are difficult, we are in fact capable of cutting down on the things we once thought were essential. We're struggling, but we're still able to carry on and remain positive. This goes to show that thanks to the changes in convenient living that have come about in the anthropocene such as WiFi, extensive road networks, large supermarkets, online shopping and healthcare, we are capable of surviving in harsh times. If we can make these changes for a global pandemic, why not for a global climate emergency? Why not for a mass extinction of valuable wildlife? Humans are an incredible species. We did not survive by being the strongest or the fastest; we survived by being the most adaptable and we're proving that fact at this very moment.
Thanks for reading (if anyone did lol)
Comments
Post a Comment