The long term consequences on a geological time scale (Berger and Loutre, 2002 and Moriarty and Honnery, 2011), may lead to a change in the rhythm of glacial-interglacial cycles. It would take a species possessing

absolute wisdom and total control to prevent its own inventions ABT-263 clinical trial from getting out of hand. “
“Landscapes around the world are extensively altered by agriculture, forestry, mining, water storage and diversion, and urbanization. Human activities have modified more than half of Earth’s land area in both the form and sediment fluxes of landscapes (Hooke et al., 2012); less than 25% of Earth’s ice-free area can be considered wild (Ellis and Ramankutty, 2008). Earlier human alterations, though often forgotten, exacted significant impacts that may persist to the present day. For IWR-1 in vitro example, in the eastern United States, post-European land “management” activities in the 1700s and 1800s resulted in large volumes of upland soil erosion and floodplain aggradation behind

thousands of milldams (Walter and Merritts, 2008). Today, the geomorphic effects of on-going urban and suburban development in the same areas can only be understood in the context of the legacy of historical human activities (Bain et al., 2012 and Voli et al., 2013). A strong tradition in geomorphology centers on studying human effects on river systems and other landscape processes (Thomas, 1956). The effects of dams on channel geometry Farnesyltransferase (e.g., Williams and Wolman, 1984), the impact of forest harvest on sediment fluxes (e.g., Grant and Wolff, 1991), and the consequence of agricultural practices on erosion and sedimentation (e.g., Happ et al., 1940) are but a few of the examples of studies seeking to understand humans as geomorphic agents.

Nonetheless, many geomorphic studies are still set in or referenced to areas perceived to be undisturbed by human activities. In a period in which human alteration is increasingly ubiquitous and often multi-layered, we require an invigorated focus on the geomorphology of human activity. Such a discipline, which has been called anthropogenic geomorphology (Szabó, 2010) and anthropogeomorphology (Cuff, 2008), must encompass both direct and indirect consequences of human activity in the past and the present. It must investigate not only the ways that humans modify geomorphic forms and processes, but the way the alterations impact subsequent human activities and resource use through positive and negative feedbacks (Chin et al., 2013a). The discipline must recognize not only the effects of individual human alterations, but also their heterogeneity and cumulative effects across both time and space (Kondolf and Podolak, 2013). Such investigations can benefit from approaches in both empirical data collection and numerical modeling.