This is a statistical analysis of several time series to find the best evidence to determine when the Holocene ended. We utilize nonparametric statistical methods (which are model free) to determine structural breaks on whether the cumulative human impacts on land, air and oceans are indicative of the end of the Holocene Epoch. It is shown that the use of fossil fuels was the dominant factor in achieving high standards of living, and increased life expectancy in some regions of the globe. However, human prosperity also entailed destructive impacts on the Earth System, which led Paul Crutzen to suggest that a new epoch, the Anthropocene, had begun. But there were several possible dates for the beginning of the epoch. The statistical techniques used here support 1952 as the start of the epoch, which agrees with the conclusions of the Anthropocene Working Group.
EdwardsMRTrancikJE (2014) Climate impacts of energy technologies depend on emissions timing. Nature Climate Change4: 347–352.
11.
Geological Society of America (2024) Adieu to the Anthropocene? Debating the formality of geologic time in the face of accelerating changes in Earth processes. Special session of Connects 2024, 22–25 September, Geological Society of America. Available at: https://community.geosociety.org/gsa2024/program/technical/special-sessions
GregoryAWHansenBE (1996) Residual-based tests for cointegration in models with regime shifts. Journal of Econometrics70: 99–126.
14.
Hatemi-JA (2008) Tests for cointegration with two unknown regime shifts with an application to financial market integration. Empirical Economics35: 497–505. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00181-007-0175-9
15.
IPCC Fifth Assessment Report (2001) Synthesis Report. Available at: www.ipcc.ch
16.
IUCN (2025) The IUCN red list of threatened species. Available at: www.iucnredlist.org (accessed 10 December 2025).
17.
IUGS (2023) International Chronostratigraphic Chart, version 09/2023. International Union of Geological Sciences, International Commission on Stratigraphy. Available at: www.stratigraphy.org
18.
KantI (1797) The Metaphysics of Morals (part of The Doctrine of Virtue, §17, or 6:443 in the standard Akademie edition). Cambridge University Press.
19.
KillickRFearheadPEckleyIA (2012) Optimal detection of changepoints with a linear computational cost. Journal of the American Statistical Association107(500): 1590–1598.
20.
KuwaeMYusuke YokoyamaYStephen TimsS, et al. (2024) Toward defining the Anthropocene onset using a rapid increase in anthropogenic fingerprints in global geological archives. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America121(41): e2313098121. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2313098121
21.
MakiD (2012) Tests for cointegration allowing for an unknown number of breaks. Economic Modelling29(5): 2011–2015.
22.
McCarthyFMPattersonRTHeadMJ, et al. (2023) The varved succession of Crawford Lake, Milton, Ontario, Canada as a candidate Global Boundary Stratotype Section and Point for the Anthropocene series. Anthropocene Review10: 146–176.
23.
McCarthyFMPattersonRTWalshC, et al. (2025) High-resolution analysis of the varved succession at Crawford Lake across the base of the proposed Crawfordian Stage and Anthropocene Series. Anthropocene Review12: 243–272.
24.
McNeillJREngelkeP (2016) The Great Acceleration: An Environmental History of the Anthropocene Since 1945. Harvard University Press, p.288.
National Research Council (2012) The Effects of Solar Variability on Earth’s Climate: A Workshop Report. The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/13519.
27.
OnZBAtesMEKaiserJ (2024) A conceptual and statistical framework for delineating the timing of a stratigraphic transition: Holocene-Anthropocene boundary as a case study. Progress in Physical Geography Earth and Environment · . https://doi.org/10.1177/03091333241310742
28.
OreskesN (2024) Does the Anthropocene matter?Scientific American33: 89.
ScottAJKnottM (1974) A cluster analysis method for grouping means in the analysis of variance. Biometrics30: 507–512.
31.
SteffenWBroadgateWDeutschL, et al. (2015) The trajectory of the Anthropocene: The great acceleration. Anthropocene Review2: 81–98.
32.
SteffenWLeinfelderRZalasiewiczJ, et al. (2016) Stratigraphic and Earth System approaches to defining the Anthropocene. Earth s Future4: 324–345.
33.
United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR) (2000) Sources and Effects of Ionizing Radiation. Report, Volume 1. UNSCEAR.
WalkerMJCBerkelhammerMBjorckS, et al. (2012) Formal subdivision of the Holocene Series/Epoch: a Discussion Paper by a Working Group of INTIMATE (Integration of ice-core, marine and terrestrial records) and the Subcommission on Quaternary Stratigraphy. Journal of Quaternary Science27(7): 649–659.
36.
WalkerMHeadMJBerkelhammerM, et al. (2018) Formal ratification of the subdivision of the Holocene Series/Epoch (Quaternary System/period): Two new Global Boundary Stratotype Sections and Points (GSSPs) and three new stages/subseries. Episodes41(4): 213–223.
37.
WatersCNTurnerSAnZ, et al. (2024a) The Anthropocene Epoch and Crawfordian Age: proposals by the Anthropocene Working Group. Executive Summary. https://doi.org/10.31223/X5VH70
38.
WatersCNTurnerSAnZ, et al. (2024b) The Anthropocene Epoch and Crawfordian Age: proposals by the Anthropocene Working Group. Part 1: Anthropocene Series/Epoch: stratigraphic context and justification of rank. https://doi.org/10.31223/X5MQ3C
39.
WatersCNTurnerSAnZ, et al. (2024c) The Anthropocene Epoch and Crawfordian Age: proposals by the Anthropocene Working Group. Part 2: Descriptions of the proposed Crawford Lake GSSP and supporting SABSs. https://doi.org/10.31223/X5RD71
ZhangNRSiegmundDO (2007) A modified Bayes information criterion with applications to the analysis of comparative genomic hybridization data. Biometrics63(1): 22–32.
