Antropotseen on kuidagi hoomamatu. Võib-olla põhjusel, et teistmoodi lihtsalt ei kujuta ette. See aga ei tähenda, et inimese ajastu on märkamatu. Jälgi on ikka palju. Mõned neist on kaunid ja teised jälle mitte nii kaunid. Sestap siin üks sotsioloogia valdkonnas ilmunud lugu.
Artikkel algab pilkupüüdvalt:

On 26 April 1986, reactor 4 at the nuclear plant of Chernobyl, in what is now the Ukraine, failed during a safety test. An explosion immediately followed, and the fire that ensued was not put out until 4 May. By then several natural, social and political consequences of the disaster were impossible to hide, even behind a thick curtain of iron. The technological ability to transform nature and improve social life may also bring it to an end.

Autor seab eesmärgiks:

My goal in this article is to reconsider current ideas of globalisation, and of the relations between nature and society, by looking at both risk society theory and more recent debates on the Anthropocene, which is defined as a new geological era in which humans have become the greatest transformative force on earth.

Arendus:

In his customary ambitious language, one of Ulrich Beck’s crucial arguments in Risk Society is that this mid-20th-century social order was coming to an end. Humanity had entered into a new phase of technological developments that were to trigger transformations at all levels of social life.

… ja antropotseen

The idea of the Anthropocene started to be used at the turn of the century. A particularly influential piece was published by Paul J. Crutzen, a Nobel prize winner for Chemistry in 1995, who, in a one-page article in the journal Nature introduced the term to the wider scientific community. This piece opens as follows:
For the past three centuries, the effects of humans on the global environment have escalated. Because of these anthropogenic emissions of carbon dioxide, global climate may depart significantly from natural behaviour for many millennia to come. It seems appropriate to assign the term ‘Anthropocene’ to the present, in many ways human-dominated, geological epoch, supplementing the Holocene – the warm period of the last 10–12 millennia. (Crutzen, 2002: 23)

Mõned järeldused lugemisisu suurendamiseks:

if humans carry on succeeding at what they do best, they will eventually destroy themselves. Put differently, arguments on the Anthropocene depend on the notion that humans are intrinsically unable to abandon their self-centred perspective (even in those moments of crises that threaten our collective self-destruction).

Chernilo, D. (2021). One globalisation or many? Risk society in the age of the Anthropocene. Journal of Sociology, 57(1), 12–26. https://doi.org/10.1177/1440783321997563