Debating the Anthropocene

Re: Anthroposcare tactics? Terence Corcoran, Jan. 5

Terence Corcoran opens up a useful discussion about the Anthropocene, and sheds light on the debate among geologists. While it appears to be a stretch to name an era before the strata shows evidence of it in the past, I appreciate what they are trying to do.

If they can achieve scientific consensus (and I agree with their thesis in broad terms and most specifics), then that is the big prize.

Official international recognition of the Anthropocene will hugely increase the ability to mobilize political will in the narrow time horizon left to us. We don’t have time to wait for the definitive evidence in the geological strata. The Anthropocene is real, but if we wait to call it what it is, it will be too late to turn the Titanic.

That is so often the problem with conventional science — what Dr. Paul Connett called “back end thinking” — wait until the toxic disaster is well and truly obvious, and then try to clean up the mess. This has allowed all the great pollution stories on Earth to unfold so tragically (Connett’s case study was Love Canal). Same story, different (planetary) scale. Chris Lowry, Toronto

It is important, crucial even, to educate people of all ages and political leanings as to the changing climate and what can possibly be done on our part to slow down or mitigate the acceleration of bad weather and melting sea ice.

But instead of the prime minister giving museum classes to kids and seniors, the future greener economy within Canada would be better served if every moment and resource the federal government has at its disposal were spent discussing and coming up with solutions to a more viable future economy and trade within Canada. Eric Pemberton, Montreal

P.S. Please do not interpret this letter as a slight to the importance and art of the photographic exhibition being presented.