Reacción a "Reactions to the 'New York Times' report that a commission of experts has rejected that the Anthropocene has begun"

The Anthropocene was proposed in the 1980s as a new geological epoch characterised by humanity's proven influence on the environment, but taken to the extreme assumption that humans had already 'taken the planet out' of its natural variability, which remained to be verified by indisputable scientific evidence archived in the sediments. This claim to make the Anthropocene the 'geological expression of global change' is all very well from an ideological point of view, but to become part of the body of study of the geosciences, it was necessary to be able to pass the rigorous scientific filters that are established for any candidate unit to be incorporated into the International Geological Table, something like a 'periodic table of the elements' that, in this case, affects formal units of geological record and time.  

As in the case of the chemical elements cited as examples, each new proposal goes through a series of protocols subject to strict scientific controls in three successive expert commissions. In the case of the Anthropocene, a specific multidisciplinary working group was formed which, after 14 years of studies, decided in July 2023 to submit a specific proposal to the International Subcommission on Quaternary Stratigraphy, where the first step for its eventual approval was to be taken. But it is precisely this subcommission, chaired by the well-known anthropocenicist Jan Zalasiewicz, which has rejected the proposal in the first instance, and by a large majority: 12 votes against, four in favour and two abstentions, according to reports in the North American media; the voting of the remaining three members of the subcommission is unknown (null votes or votes not cast, if we discount the previous categories). 

From my experience of eight years as vice-chairman of one of these sub-commissions, in which we approved five new Ordovician system floors, from the known data we can infer the neatness of the process, in which there was a clear call and the established deadlines were followed, otherwise there would not have been a vote. 

From a geological point of view, we live in the Megalayense, which is the most modern level/age within the Holocene Series/Epoch, belonging to the Quaternary System/Period, within the Cenozoic Eratema/Era, of the Phanerozoic Eonotema/Eon. In my modest opinion, we also live in the Anthropocene, understood as the meta-concept that has been widely used in the humanities and social sciences, by artists, environmentalists, politicians, historians, geographers, philosophers, novelists... and also in our collective of geologists, since many geoscientists defend that the Anthropocene should be considered as a wide-ranging 'geological event', which began with the appearance of man on Earth, and which manifests itself as a diachronic affection of the physical environment in different continents, ecosystems and cultures.