![]() ![]() In contrast, ecologists are more likely to accept that humans caused the extinctions. Archeologists cite overkill as one in a combination of causal mechanisms for the extinctions. We examined the ideas and arguments for which Martin’s overkill publications were cited and how they differed between archeologists and ecologists. To evaluate how different disciplines interpret and use the overkill model, we conducted a citation analysis of selected works of the main proponent of the overkill model, Paul Martin. There is still considerable debate, particularly within archeology, about the extent to which people may have been the cause of these extinctions. However, the importance of the overkill model for explaining human–environment interactions and anthropogenic impacts appears to differ across disciplines. Pleistocene overkill, the notion that humans overhunted megafauna near the end of the Pleistocene in the Americas, Australia, and beyond, is used as prime example of the impact that humans can have on the planet. Fueled in part by the debate over defining a start date for the Anthropocene, historical disciplines like archeology, paleontology, geology, and history are playing an important role in understanding long-term anthropogenic impacts on the planet. Research on human-environment interactions that informs ecological practices and guides conservation and restoration has become increasingly interdisciplinary over the last few decades. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |