Slashdot Mirror
The Doomsday Clock Is Moved Closer To Midnight
Harperdog writes "The Science and Security Board of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists has moved the hands of the Doomsday Clock from 6 minutes to midnight to 5 minutes to midnight. The Board deliberated on the decision and came to the conclusion based on a variety of events: failure on climate policy, Fukushima, nuclear proliferation, etc. This article is a good explanation of the policy decision. Lawrence Krauss said, 'As we see it, the major challenge at the heart of humanity's survival in the 21st century is how to meet energy needs for economic growth in developing and industrial countries without further damaging the climate, exposing people to loss of health and community, and without risking further spread of nuclear weapons, and in fact setting the stage for global reductions.'"
This is so stupid. I'm a lefty eco groovy person, but this is just pathetic. Almost as sad as Heston's "From my cold dead hands" battlecry.
It just puts emphasis on the moonbats on the left, and ammo for Faux News, rather than addressing the issues in a non sensationalist way.
Sigh.
https://www.accountkiller.com/removal-requested
We have a doomsday clock.
Sooner or later they're going to box themselves into a corner - they only have so many discrete 1-minute steps they can take before they find that the world is more fucked up than they thought possible, but somehow still carrying on.
Then what? Leave it at 1-minute to midnight, or edge ever closer in smaller and smaller increments?
This is purely a fear mongering political protest.
A few more minutes and we can start playing "2 minutes to midnight" by Iron Maiden!
BST
'As we see it, the major challenge at the heart of humanity's survival in the 21st century is how to meet energy needs for economic growth in developing and industrial countries without further damaging the climate, exposing people to loss of health and community, and without risking further spread of nuclear weapons, and in fact setting the stage for global reductions.'
I've held a very similar opinion for many, many years (as have many others, I'm certain). After reading this quote, I had two immediate reactions, one hopeful and one cynical:
1. I'd like to think that safe, clean fusion power is just around the corner. I've become less convinced of this over the years but am still holding out hope. Can anything else provide the power levels and the energy densities required to sustain a technological urban society's advancement on the Kardashev scale?
2. And we wonder where all the interstellar civilizations are. All signs are pointing to a factor in the Drake Equation that minimizes the number of civilizations that last long enough to achieve starfaring status. Sadly, it appears more and more that this factor approaches zero...
I can see the fnords!
I have it on authority, that next year's doomsday criteria will include sasquatch sightings.
They forgot to mention the coming war with Iran. Like it or not, for reason or without, it is coming.
So, a doomsday clock that started at 11:53 in 1947 is now at 11:55... based upon that rate of advancement (2 minutes per 65 years, obviously ignoring any other adjustments), we should be safe for over a century and a half. I've heard far more alarming predictions than that. Nothing to see here.
There is nothing scientific about this clock, and most scientists would surely admit it. It is political and is meant to sway public opinion. So what we have here are either a) fake scientists, b) real scientists shooting themselves in the foot, or c) politicians.
The whole point of the scientific method is to be grounded on evidence and be void of any political, social, or even personal biases. I have nothing against this silly clock, but as long as science lends its name to garbage such as this, science will always have a hard time in politics claiming itself to be scientific.
The whole point of a doomsday clock... is LOST if you keep it a secret!
WHY DIDN'T YOU TELL THE WORLD, EH?
"Mind, as manifested by the capacity to make choices, is to some extent present in every electron." -Freeman Dyson
Assuming that you ignore the fact that 'the environment' in Western nations is vastly better off than it was in 1947. We don't get thousands of people dying in a London smog these days, for example.
That's in part because the west has exported its manufacturing of consumer goods (and therefore exported its pollution and environmental degradation) to "developing nations" that have lower wages and fewer environmental regulations. Cheap goods for us = smog for China.
With Pakistan shuffling their nukes around in un-armoured minimally guarded vans, North Korea continuing to develop its nuclear facilities and Iran apparently hell bent on getting the bomb I'm more surprised they didn't move the needle sooner.
Agreed. Iran isn't friendly to the West, but it's an advanced country where many (not all) have a pretty decent quality of life and enjoy far more freedoms than those in NK. Iranian people know something about the outside world and is free to travel to (most) other countries. And it seems many do - bumped into quite a lot of Iranians around the place while travelling (particularly in Asia and Europe) and they seem articulate and well-educated.
Compare that to NK where most cannot travel and you are fed, literally from birth, a constant stream of misinformation along the lines of "other countries are evil/trying to destroy us, and those that aren't live in terrible poverty far worse than what we have here in North Korea".
Plus the Iranian leaders are at least vaguely rational human beings. I think North Korea is far more likely to do something crazy and irrational that would result in war than Iran is.
Just to recap, "MAD" stands for "Mutually Assured Destruction." If the enemy is a small band of religious wackos they can't get enough nukes to destroy a major country. One city, sure; ten cities, maybe; destroy the country, no way. So they can do some damage but not destroy their target. Likewise they are hard to locate and easy to disperse. You'd be surprised how useless nukes are against a moving enemy whom you can't locate to within a few miles' radius. So the whole MAD strategy becomes irrelevant. Neither side can destroy the other but they can nuke each other ... maybe multiple times. This is why nuclear proliferation is scary: it changes the stable MAD scenario to an unstable one where there is no deterrent to small-scale nuclear exchange.
[Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
Throughout history, the most accurate depiction of human civilization is that of a man running for his life, with a pack of ravening wolves snapping at his heels. So; what else is new?
Regards;