In 1870 Antonio Stoppani started the tear Anthropocene epoch but I believed in stared before that in 1760 during the industrial age. Kolbert writes about the time of agriculture but I don’t think it started that far back because to me Anthropocene will have a world ending effect in which I don’t believe that just change crops would do that. “Coal was first linked to the ever-expanding spiral of capitalist commodity production.(Malm, p. 2) ” I would vote yes!
Scientist are not challenged by their views in their peer groups and they all encouraged the same idea. Many follow the path that fits their values best, not being able to have an open mind can be a side effect. Also the pressure to fit in to their peer groups typically make inventions that help the ‘us’ not the ‘them’ and the ‘them’ are going to be the ones that are most inflicted during climate change in the years to come. Islands and under developed places will not have the means to save their people in the numbers like the United States “People with different values draw different inferences from the same evidence” Dan Kahan states. It’s hard to come up with a solutions everyone agrees too when everyone have such different viewpoints. Dr. Cathy showed a short video, for me the underlining concept was that just getting together to talk can make the biggest impacts on resolving problems that effect a group of people in the same way. I really think getting together at the college level can change many events in the world. People need to understand that climate change effects everyone. Environmental groups that believe in climate change have to continue to reach out. Also don’t forget the little towns, little towns I think will be easier to start to rally up and make a difference.