Earth Systems

Noise pollution in Malta and more specifically in the Birkirkara-Mrieħel region is not studied. This is mainly due to lack of regulations as well as due to the lack of management plans set in place to monitor and reduce high levels of noise. The area of study was chosen because it incorporated three different land-use types, which were domestic, agricultural and industrial zones. Noise was monitored and compared between the three different zones, as well as between different hours within the day time frame (7a.m.-7p.m.).
Measurements were taken during the peak periods in weekdays. Inititially, the potential use of smartphones for future crowd-sourced assessment for noise pollution and/or their use for the identification of unhealthy noise levels was investigated. This was done by comparing the data collected by various phone makes with that recorded by professional sound level meters. The results derived from this study showed that noise was louder in industrial zones than in domestic zones and that agricultural zones were as loud as domestic ones. It also showed that there were variations between noise in the morning and noise in the afternoon in the industrial area, but there were no significant differences between morning and afternoon measurements for the domestic and the agricultural zone. Results also showed that there is the possibility of using smartphones to measure noise however measurements are not accurate enough to fall within the range required for professional noise-measuring equipment, and results are influenced by the phone brand and by the phone application used to collect data.

How we approach the concept of resilience, I will be suggesting, is closely associated with our imagining of injury, vulnerability and trauma. But in turn, how we think about  our own exposure – our fleshy and psychic susceptibility - is bound up with the different  ways in which we conceive of the rifting and rumbling of our geophysical environment.
In the midst of the Anthropocene event this exchange between tropes of planetary and bodily perishability is not only more complex than ever, I contend, but embodies a fundamental tension. Is harm largely generated within a body or system - or does it come from a potentially hostile exterior? To put it another way, is the pursuit of resilience a question of responding to the threats of self-inflicted injury – or is it more
about coming to terms with a basic perviousness and exposure to outside forces? The weighting we put on these two options matters, I argue, and it is closely tied to differences within the geoscience community who are exploring the Anthropocene thesis.

A specialized vision of a “sphere of the archaic” is proposed. Extraterrestrial archaeosphere, humanly modified ground, fossil reality, archaeological record, and totality of archaeological objects are among the concepts that have contributed to the newer construct. The archaeosphere’s form, nature, essence, and function are revealed by analyzing its components in terms of formation processes as well as in view of the mutuality continuum amongst archaeological universals. The model treats this global system as a coherent universalized hierarchy of doublenatured entities which are subject to deposition and recovery, an extensive systemic imprint of behavioral and non-behavioral conversion of the variety of phenomena of culture-to-nature synergy. Further discussion is expected, with the archaeosphere amidst Earth systems, its structure and periodization under special vigilance. What the archaeological megadiscipline regularly does is creating an archaeospheric conception of reality.
Key words: Earth, archaeosphere, cultural genesis, archaeogenesis, universals, archaeology, archaeohistory.

In the 21st century, humanity has entered an era of a turbulent, globalised and politically awakened world of the Anthropocene where science clearly shows that we need a global energy transformation for a sustainable future. Science is fundamental and it seems that nobody even global leaders can deny its unquestionable proofs. It provides evidence-based directives that are helpful for humanity to safely navigate its way through a period of the novel, global challenges. Unfortunately, more recently, the future and our existence have been undermined since the prevailing structure of the international system is not fair towards the Earth. “The present system has been inducing states to comply with global norms in ways that actually exacerbate unsustainable development rather than sustainable development.” (Stevenson, 2012: 4). Recent cataclysmic weather events ranging from raging wildfires, torrential rains, widespread floods, devastating droughts, catastrophic earthquakes, crippling hurricanes and spectacular volcano eruptions show that Earth is ailing. Unfortunately, it seems that there is a limit of what human civilisation can do against the forces of nature. Science shows that there is a connection between climate change with its most visible signs such as melting glaciers, rising sea levels, increasing weight of oceans, increased volcanic activity worldwide with human actions. Are these all not the signs that our planet is awakening? Undoubtedly, the living Earth or Gaia is an open system and it seems that it might be protesting against human actions that are evidently harmful to her. According to ancient beliefs, earth is a goddess, who can use her powers destructively or creatively (Toynbee, 1976: 290). Throughout history, climate has been variable, it has also impacted in various ways on the development of past civilisations what will be discussed in the paper. Up to 1950s, it could be argued that climate variations could be explained by natural factors. However, from the mid-century, the steep rise in temperature occurred, so it is clear that the most recent warming of the climate is due to human factors (Attenborough, 2006). Moreover, science has delivered numerous proofs that global warming is a result of human-induced climate change. Plus, some IR scholars argue that climate change is a global issue that is likely to exacerbate migration, civil unrest and even conflict. Realism states that it is a threat multiplier since it exists in the nexus of catastrophe, conflict and migration in the worst-case scenario leading to the global turmoil. Many prominent authorities in the world of science, such as Steven Hawking, point to the doomsday scenarios arguing that population rise, climate change and finite resources on Earth will result in life becoming increasingly dangerous on the planet. So the only way to preserve civilisation to build upon the progress made over the last century will be to look out to the rest of the galaxy. However, other scholars state that it might be incredibly difficult for humans to reach for the stars and colonise cosmos unless major, global problems will be first solved here, on Earth. Despite these opinions, as always, there is also a bright side to the problem. There were periods in the past when Earth’s climate has been relatively stable. Such conditions happened for the last 12,000 years. Such stability and reasonably balanced and mild climate without any major Ice Ages have been critical for the development of modern civilisation. Favourable climate conditions enabled humans to pursue agriculture, domesticate animals, settle down and develop culture and arts leading to the flourishing of civilisations and creative and splendid periods of Golden Ages. Space observations, astronomy combined with archaeology and climate science, give us valuable clues as to how ancient civilisations, like that of the Mayans and the Old Kingdom of Egypt, collapsed. Scientific evidence suggests that climate change and drought, in particular, has been at least partly responsible for the rise and fall of many ancient civilisations. This paper argues that stable way of life for present civlisation depends on a stable climate. Humanity must listen more carefully to the voice of our planet, living Earth or Gaia. Faced with a changing climate, we must learn the lessons of the past, study past civilisations, and simply adapt. The primary requirement is that civilisation builds just and responsible management of the global commons by overcoming the tragedy of the commons. This could be done when states commit to solving, or at least, understanding, and to some extent, wisely managing climate on Earth. Throughout centuries, science has been a reflection of our instinct for civilisational survival. In 1908, Svante Arrhenius argued that an increased greenhouse effect due to human activity would be a good thing, preventing a new Ice Age. At the time, he did not consider the risks of rising sea level and local disruption of agriculture. Today, humanity faces a choice: either to enact smart actions leading to homeostasis or to remain in a passive, climatic impasse resembling 'a Gordian knot' or rather a contest with the forces of creation. The latter would probably end in increasing strains on the finite planet. This would signify a regression on the trajectory of human progress. The old truth says that the Earth could be hospitable, but it can be also destructive. We must appreciate the fact that humanity is intrinsically part of nature, but sometimes, we have to be made to feel very small and insignificant because the laws that govern it are beyond human domination. According to the Gaia theory, Earth's natural cycles work together to keep the Earth healthy and support life on the planet. As a result, we have to listen more sensitively to Gaia so that to start to live in harmony with her. To do that, we have to act in sync with nature and try to understand it better, so that our solutions are more approved by her and are not only selfish and functional only from our point of view. Humans have to preserve the delicate, ecological balance that has been formed between indigenous societies and our planet. At the moment, rare species face the danger of extinction, humans continue with deforestation while the cultural heritage of tribes and simple societies who managed to coexist with nature is replaced by consumer society. “The Earth, our home, is beginning to look more and more like an immense pile of filth.” (Pope Francis, 2015: 16). Individuals no more have a connection with the spiritual, they no longer care and respect Gaia. However, Gaia will not allow operating beyond its natural limits, she will inevitably bring back the ecological balance what in the worst-case scenario might lead to diseases, protracted suffering, or even a dangerous climax. Essentially, Earth wants to clean itself and take on another new look, it can be done with humans. Earth will be showing the right pathway. Humanity has to simply listen and engineer our way forward. Humans can either prepare for adaptation and live in a healthy symbiosis (which is a mechanism of evolutionary innovation) with the natural world or remain in stagnation, chronic disease, complaining about reappearing and unbearable heatwaves, wildfires, sea level rises and mass displacements of people, all televised by the mass media, with the ailing Gaia and suffering humanity - quite pathetic and unacceptable. Such an unhealthy condition or rather 'the clash of the titans' with an increasingly hostile civilisation in which people become alienated and detached from God and His cosmic Master plan for our planet, might be risking a confrontation after which there might be a decline in civilisational growth. Heroic leaders though can in the nick of time gain a strategic vision for planetary preservation. Following sensitivity to 'the cry of the Earth', they could make our planet great again and not just individual nations great again. But self-indulgent, hedonistic, consumption-oriented society cannot project a moral imperative on the world. Heroic leaders have to direct organised humanity onto the sustainable pathways of clean energy, preservation of natural ecosystems and peaceful coexistence. Science says that to avoid climate catastrophe civilisation needs to reduce carbon emissions by 80 per cent by the middle of this century. Putting pressure on global leaders to act is one strategy, but equally, we have to propose practical solutions of Earth's healing. As Pope Francis (2015) noted, “Strategies for a solution demand an integrated approach to combating poverty, restoring dignity to the excluded, and at the same time protecting nature.” Comprehensive and holistic strategies require education in elucidating insights from norm-centred constructivism (the life cycle of climate norms), climate philanthropy, education of girls, meteorology, cultural and spiritual ecology and biomimicry.

We are nothing more than accumulated cosmic dust assembled and fused together through a continuum of time with no accurately established beginning, nor an absolute final conclusion. How is it that we have become an organism, a species that possesses an ability to adapt and survive? What is conscious awareness, and is everyone in the human family cognizant of it? Are we the only functioning organism that can demonstrate this ability? Is what we do not know, what we do not know knowledge lost, or does it even exist? Are we as a species compatible with the natural ecosystem, the planet, the universe?

Peatlands are an important natural archive for past climatic changes, primarily due to their sensitivity to changes in the water balance and the dating possibilities of peat sediments. In addition, peatlands are an important sink as well as potential source of greenhouse gases. The first part of this chapter discusses a range of well-established and novel proxies studied in peat cores (peat humification, macrofossils, testate amoebae, stomatal records from subfossil leaves, organic biomarkers and stable isotope ratios, aeolian sediment influx ...

To understand sustainability sufficiently enough for meaningful analysis and successful real-world implementation, it is essential to make sense of its abstractness, complexities, holistic nature, and multiple dimensions. Here, I offer a generalized Earth Systems Model that depicts the planet's dominant systems and processes, some of the system complexities that challenge our understanding and practice, and some of the possible negative and positive drivers and outcomes.