Scholars demand transparency over contested Anthropocene epoch vote

Two years after the International Union of Geological Sciences rejected a formal Anthropocene epoch, scholars have resurfaced allegations of procedural flaws in the 2024 vote. Historian Jürgen Renn and co-authors argue that undisclosed documents indicate the decision was not properly justified, and they call for the IUGS to make those records public and to commission an independent audit. IUGS voting subcommittee co-chair Adele Bertini says she is open to scrutiny and points to a recent technical comment explaining the rejection.

Proponents of the Anthropocene, including Jan Zalasiewicz, maintain that a formal definition would cement the term’s widespread use, citing evidence such as a 1952 plutonium layer and greenhouse-gas spikes. Opponents, like Phil Gibbard, view the Anthropocene as a geological event rather than an epoch, favoring a more flexible classification. The controversy highlights broader questions about how the scientific community validates major stratigraphic changes.