Alejandro
Cearreta Bilbao
University of Leicester
Leicester, Reino UnidoPublicaciones en colaboración con investigadores/as de University of Leicester (23)
2024
-
Palaeontological signatures of the Anthropocene are distinct from those of previous epochs
Earth-Science Reviews, Vol. 255
-
The Anthropocene within the Geological Time Scale: a response to fundamental questions
Episodes, Vol. 47, Núm. 1, pp. 65-83
-
The future extent of the Anthropocene epoch: A synthesis
Global and Planetary Change, Vol. 242
2023
-
Response to Merritts et al. (2023): The Anthropocene is complex. Defining it is not
Earth-Science Reviews, Vol. 238
-
The Anthropocene as an epoch is distinct from all other concepts known by this term: a reply to Swindles et al. (2023)
Journal of Quaternary Science
-
The Anthropocene is a prospective epoch/series, not a geological event
Episodes, Vol. 46, Núm. 2, pp. 229-238
2022
-
Epochs, events and episodes: Marking the geological impact of humans
Earth-Science Reviews, Vol. 234
-
Planetary-scale change to the biosphere signalled by global species translocations can be used to identify the Anthropocene
Palaeontology, Vol. 65, Núm. 4
-
The proposed Anthropocene Epoch/Series is underpinned by an extensive array of mid-20th century stratigraphic event signals
Journal of Quaternary Science, Vol. 37, Núm. 7, pp. 1181-1187
2020
-
Author Correction: Extraordinary human energy consumption and resultant geological impacts beginning around 1950 CE initiated the proposed Anthropocene Epoch (Communications Earth & Environment, (2020), 1, 1, (32), 10.1038/s43247-020-00029-y)
Communications Earth and Environment
-
Extraordinary human energy consumption and resultant geological impacts beginning around 1950 CE initiated the proposed Anthropocene Epoch
Communications Earth and Environment, Vol. 1, Núm. 1
-
UNDERGROUND METRO SYSTEMS A durable geological proxy of rapid urban population growth and energy consumption during the Anthropocene
ROUTLEDGE COMPANION TO BIG HISTORY (ROUTLEDGE), pp. 434-455
2019
-
A formal Anthropocene is compatible with but distinct from its diachronous anthropogenic counterparts: a response to W.F. Ruddiman’s ‘three flaws in defining a formal Anthropocene’
Progress in Physical Geography, Vol. 43, Núm. 3, pp. 319-333
2018
-
Global Boundary Stratotype Section and Point (GSSP) for the Anthropocene Series: Where and how to look for potential candidates
Earth-Science Reviews, Vol. 178, pp. 379-429
2017
-
Making the case for a formal Anthropocene Epoch: An analysis of ongoing critiques
Newsletters on Stratigraphy, Vol. 50, Núm. 2, pp. 205-226
-
Scale and diversity of the physical technosphere: A geological perspective
Anthropocene Review, Vol. 4, Núm. 1, pp. 9-22
-
The Working Group on the Anthropocene: Summary of evidence and interim recommendations
Anthropocene, Vol. 19, pp. 55-60
2016
-
Stratigraphic and Earth System approaches to defining the Anthropocene
Earth's Future, Vol. 4, Núm. 8, pp. 324-345
-
The Anthropocene is functionally and stratigraphically distinct from the Holocene
Science, Vol. 351, Núm. 6269
-
The Anthropocene: A conspicuous stratigraphical signal of anthropogenic changes in production and consumption across the biosphere
Earth's Future, Vol. 4, Núm. 3, pp. 34-53