Slashdot Mirror


Doomsday Clock Moved Two Minutes Forward, To 23:57

An anonymous reader writes As reported by CNN and Time, the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists has moved their famed Doomsday Clock two minutes closer to midnight. Now at 23:57, this clock attempts to personify humanity's closeness to a global catastrophe (as caused by either climate change or nuclear war). According to the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, this change is due to a lack of action regarding climate issues, the continued existence of nuclear weapon stockpiles, and the increased animosity that now exists between the United States and Russia.

43 of 216 comments (clear)

  1. IMO by Osgeld · · Score: 4, Insightful

    its horseshit scare tactics that dont work anymore over nonsense bullshit that has no leg to stand on

    so who cares, move it to 1 am, doesnt mean a damn thing

    1. Re:IMO by Tablizer · · Score: 5, Funny

      Nuke the doomsday clock!

    2. Re:IMO by Z00L00K · · Score: 2

      We are already 20 minutes into the future of that clock.

      --
      If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
    3. Re:IMO by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 5, Insightful

      In the days when the Doomsday Clock was published by actual atomic scientists, it measured their perception of how imminent the Cold War danger was. The end of Communism cut the Doomsday Clockers adrift, much as Salk vaccine did to the March of Dimes.

      So are the SJWs who found this thing in the attic and dusted it off advancing the clock because of carbon, or because of Islam? Let me guess...

    4. Re:IMO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      its horseshit scare tactics that dont work anymore over nonsense bullshit that has no leg to stand on

      so who cares, move it to 1 am, doesnt mean a damn thing

      Uh, I could be spitballing here, but maybe, just maybe, the original designers of the clock felt that humanity should fucking care.

      Or perhaps it was created to point out that they should. It's not called the Bake-A-Cake clock.

      And don't get me started on horseshit scare tactics. Politics have caused more panic and damage with global warming than 10,000 clocks ever could.

    5. Re:IMO by rossdee · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "so who cares, move it to 1 am, doesnt mean a damn thing"

      They'll do that in March anyway.

    6. Re:IMO by fuzznutz · · Score: 2

      its horseshit scare tactics that dont work anymore over nonsense bullshit that has no leg to stand on

      so who cares, move it to 1 am, doesnt mean a damn thing

      I had no idea the doomsday clock was still a thing. The last I heard about it was way before the Berlin Wall fell. This is clearly a PR stunt to try to remain relevant in a world that no longer worries about Soviet ICBMs raining down.

    7. Re:IMO by Bartles · · Score: 2

      They problem is they have advanced it so far that it has become meaningless. Like always having an orange national security threat level.

    8. Re:IMO by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Climate Change Deniers have taken to calling themselves Skeptics precisely because of this negative connotation to our cause, just as AGW proponents changed to talk of Climate Change when they saw that Global Warming was no longer winning over the masses with their fear-mongering.

      Yep, it is hilarious considering that those deniers are part of the religious right (often stating their reason for denying climate change is something about god). To them, skeptics have the negative connotation. I guess they can't ask for people to believe their claims "on faith" anymore.

      Wrong on both counts.

      First, your revisionist history does not match recorded history. Most of the people you call deniers have ALWAYS labeled themselves skeptics. There are some just plain disbelievers, who disbelieve based on faith. But the majority of them follow the actual science.

      Second, most of these skeptics are NOT right-wing religious fanatics.

      Both of these myths have been promoted by the True Believers: the alarmists who can't back up their claims with real science.

      The recent declaration of 2014 as "the hottest year" -- when it wasn't anything of the kind -- is a wonderful illustration of the idiocy behind CO2 warming alarmism. Self-described Climate Scientists claimed the satellite temperature record would be the most accurate ever. And it is. But now that the satellite data is disproving their pet theory, they just leave that data out.

      It's really quite hilarious.

  2. Oh yay, more about the bullshit clock by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You know, when something says that we are so close to destruction for over half a century... well you have to wonder why anyone would put any stock in it. It is a bit hard to reconcile with being on the edge of destruction, and yet everything continuing to not be destroyed.

    1. Re:Oh yay, more about the bullshit clock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Apparently we're closer (23:57) to an apocalypse than in any time during 1960 - 1984. This includes the Cuban missile crisis.

    2. Re:Oh yay, more about the bullshit clock by Imrik · · Score: 2

      Nukes are generally almost completely unhackable as they use technology designed during the cold war, no networks, no commercial interfaces. They're probably far more vulnerable to social hacks than technological ones.

    3. Re:Oh yay, more about the bullshit clock by ultranova · · Score: 5, Interesting

      You know, when something says that we are so close to destruction for over half a century... well you have to wonder why anyone would put any stock in it. It is a bit hard to reconcile with being on the edge of destruction, and yet everything continuing to not be destroyed.

      Did you know the most dangerous drivers are not those who have just gotten their license, but those who have had a bit of experience? The reason is that new drivers are all too aware that they're one bad decision away from being gruesomely killed, while those who have driven for a while let their guard down because "nothing's happened so far, so nothing ever will".

      This is true for dangerous acitvities in general. Someone who's handling boiling acid for the first time will make damn sure to think what they're doing. Someone who's done it a hundred times is busy thinking what they'll be having for lunch. And then acid gets somewhere it shouldn't, and suddenly things get very exciting again.

      We haven't been destroyed because we've been very lucky. During Cuban missile crisis American ships actually dropped depth charges on a nuke-carrying Russian submarine. The captain and the political officer were all for launching it in retaliation, but the idea was vetoed by Vasili Arkhipov. And it's not the only time humanity's fate has hung on the decisions of a single person.

      And of course this is all ignoring the possibilities of, say, biological warfare advancing technology is bringing to within reach of even non-state actors. You may not have noticed, but some of these actors are nowhere near as rational nor benevolent as the Soviet Russia of old.

      Finally, the dawning of the Information Age is challenging whole new facets of human capacity for evil. Hypocrisy is quickly becoming impossible as privacy continues to erode. At the same time, anonymity serves to strip away pretensions of civility and expose the grinning skull beneath all too many faces. With Industrial Age, the choice was "cease warring or die"; with Information Age it's "stop being hypocrites or have your souls crushed". Given that it took two world wars to get humanity to the point where we had any chance to survive harnessing the power of the atom, I shudder to think what it'll take to prepare us for omnipresent computation.

      We're running a gauntlet, a purgatory forcing us to choose between our shadow or increasing amounts of pain. Every aspect of our existence is being confronted by its shortcomings like never before, for there are no more second chances. Humanity will either demonstrate it has mastered its dark side before it will master nature and reach the stars, or it will send itself to oblivion so more worthy beings might inherit them instead. It's not two minutes to midnight, it's Judgement Day.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

  3. Re:Fear by CurryCamel · · Score: 3, Insightful

    or alternatively - go do something already!
    Looking at all the smart(ass) comments on slashdot gives me hope that 'living in harmony and peace' is not beyond our intelligence capabilities as the human race (how hard can it be?!?). Somebody just needs to kick the cynics' collective butt.
    Fair try with the clock. 7/10.

  4. Re:Fear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    I run a refrigerator 24/7 with the door open. If everyone did the same, we would significantly cool the planet.

  5. Re:More Global Warming Alarmism!!!!!!!! by aaron4801 · · Score: 2, Funny

    Obviously this group is advocating a simple solution: Set off a couple nukes. Not only would that reduce the world's stockpile, it would also start a mini nuclear-winter, which offsets global warming! It's clearly the solution to both problems these guys worry about.

  6. ^^Winner by TrollstonButterbeans · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The risk of nuclear war was very real during the Cold war. Today, those countries are trading partners and run in a far more responsive manner, Russia is a democracy.

    The idea of the Doomsday clock being closer than the cold war is silly.

    Take the clock, put it in the trash. Disband the committee. Perhaps the symbol helped awareness during the Cold war but this is just a joke now.

    --
    Priest: "Universe from nothing, no laws of physics, sped up time"+ huge discrepancies. Creationism? No. Big Bang Theory
    1. Re:^^Winner by quenda · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Russia is a democracy.

      Ha, good one Trollston! You had me there for a minute.

    2. Re:^^Winner by Opportunist · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Which one isn't? Even though I'd debate the intelligence of some agencies, but the first part?

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    3. Re:^^Winner by Gadget_Guy · · Score: 2

      The idea of the Doomsday clock being closer than the cold war is silly.

      Considering that the doomsday didn't eventuate during the cold war then it is not necessarily wrong to say that it was closer then than now. The main difference between the danger being face now and then was that back then you didn't have a huge segment of the population disbelieving the experts who said that the world was in danger. Nobody was so stupid enough to say that just because people died before the atom bomb was invented that it means that bomb couldn't be responsible for killing anyone now (to adopt one of the anti-AGW lines).

      We are actually closer to danger now because politically we are further from a solution than we were back then. At least both sides recognised that they had to consider the ramifications of their actions and that something had to be done. Fast forward to today, and the two sides now want different things; one wants to change things while the other wants to keep the status quo. That is far more dangerous than what we had in the past.

      The other crucial difference is that for the danger of doomsday to exist back then, someone would have to make the decision to "push the button". Someone would have to decide to be actively responsible for armageddon. The danger we face now is opposite. If we don't take action this time then the predicted doomsday will happen by itself. Nobody has to press any button to make bad things happen. We are closer to doomsday because the button was already pressed years ago when we started down the path of rapid expansion of our use of fossil fuels.

      The fact is that the doomsday clock actually worked during the cold war. It kept the issue in the minds of the people, so that the political will was there to solve the problem. The clock wasn't accurate nor inaccurate. It was a symbol.

      In the same way, the changing of the clock isn't striving for accuracy in as much as it is raising the notion that we are facing a crisis in the public perception. And it is needed now more than ever.

  7. you can't boil this down to one variable by Karmashock · · Score: 3, Insightful

    maybe when it was just the US vs USSR this might have been almost workable but at this point you really need a different clock for every nuclear power.

    And short of that, this stupid clock is meaningless.

    --
    I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
  8. Re:More Global Warming Alarmism!!!!!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Global warming is a hoax.

    Try to separate reality from politics. Al Gore and the rest of the billionaire elite may well be using Global warming as an excuse to keep us peons down yet such actions are independent of and speak nothing about whether global warming itself is occurring nor does it shed any light on what potential consequences if any may be. These are things that require careful research and consideration to arrive at an understanding that isn't completely worthless.

    It is possible to concurrently agree with a climate prediction while strongly disagreeing about what should be done about it.

    A wealth redistribution program

    Gasoline is a wealth redistribution program if ever there was one with hard earned dollars going to fund cartoon empires with medieval sensibilities all around the globe.

    The claims more and more outrageous. What's next? Amber Alerts over gasoline guzzlers? EPA patrols at night to enforce a driving curfew or carpools?

    Doubtful "elite" have appetites for things which also negatively affect them. Taxing shit they dislike to death so peons can't afford is more their style.

    Want to stop 'man made' global warming? Kill yourself. End overpopulation. Starting with the UN and every politician.

    As an agent of the Aschen confederation you should demonstrate more patience.

  9. I got a better clock by Nyder · · Score: 4, Funny

    It's always set to 4:20.

    --
    Be seeing you...
  10. Re:Wow you sure showed me! by Imrik · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Genes aren't the only things that are hereditary. Many behaviors are learned from the environment rather than being innate to a person's biology.

  11. Balderdash by jabberw0k · · Score: 5, Funny

    That man in the White House has won the Nobel Peace Prize.

    1. Re:Balderdash by Isaac-1 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Make that was given, regardless of if you are an Obama supporter or not, you must admit many of the resasons he was given the prize so early in his presidency were not based on actions, but based on campaign promises that never came to passs.

    2. Re:Balderdash by Livius · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Obama got it for not being Bush, which at the time was a major step forward for world peace.

    3. Re:Balderdash by phayes · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Has world peace made a major step forward in the years Obama has been President? No. In fact by abandoning Iraq before they were ready Obama fostered the Islamic State which we will be spending the next few presidencies working on.

      Obama was indeed handed the NPP for not being Bush but that says more about the NPP's political leanings and how irrelevant the NPP is than anything else.

      --
      Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue
  12. Wait a second... by Cheviot · · Score: 4, Insightful

    When did they add climate change to the Doomsday Clock and what makes the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists experts on how much closer global warming puts us to global catastrophe?

    1. Re:Wait a second... by Cheviot · · Score: 2

      Don't get me wrong, I value their opinion. But if suddenly I found out that odds of an earthquake were added to the National Weather Service's hurricane warning system I'd be asking the same question.

      The clock has always been about the odds of nuclear annihilation. Saying it's now also about global warming makes no sense.

  13. Re:More Global Warming Alarmism!!!!!!!! by Chas · · Score: 4, Insightful

    A wealth redistribution program

    Gasoline is a wealth redistribution program if ever there was one with hard earned dollars going to fund cartoon empires with medieval sensibilities all around the globe.

    Yeah. But with gasoline. You get...gasoline. Something for something.

    With "carbon credits" you get...what? Some guy going "Good for you dude! And thanks for the cash!". Something for nothing.

    --


    Chas - The one, the only.
    THANK GOD!!!
  14. Re:Be a scientist and look at the data by FoxMcElroy · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Which sex is responsible for the vast majority of crime? Which sex has the most deadbeat fathers? I'm reasonably confident you're male because women don't post like this, statistically. Were you born a deviant creature? Black people scored much worse in the 1970s than white people and the gap has been closing. Are their genes adapting at an incredible rate? Since there are many black people far smarter than you or me, it's clear environment is far more important than genes. So, how do you think a racist environment affects children? You don't want to make anything better, but you could.

  15. Re:What a surprise by Opportunist · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Wait, there's a left now in US politics? When did that happen?

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  16. Re:nobody fucking cares by drinkypoo · · Score: 2

    What have you found that's better thanks sex? Heroine?

    No, you can have sex with a heroine. The word you want is heroin. HTH, HAND.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  17. Re:More Global Warming Alarmism!!!!!!!! by Opportunist · · Score: 2

    Why the bickering about whether it's man made or natural? I honestly don't want to resolve the question on whether someone set my house on fire or whether lightning hit it while it's still burning, first I want it extinguished, then we can find out what caused it!

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  18. Re:Be a scientist and look at the data by drinkypoo · · Score: 4, Informative

    Which sex is responsible for the vast majority of crime?

    That's a good question. Women are likely convicted less when guilty (read also following section) so it's impossible to say.

    Which sex has the most deadbeat fathers?

    And now we see how surveys are conducted.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  19. Re:Shouldn't it be past 12? by Gadget_Guy · · Score: 2

    We were told in something like 2005 that unless there was action X within 4 years then we would be heading to disaster.

    No, we were not told that. Your assertion is simply a lie. Global warming happens over a much longer time period than this. There is not one single climatologist who would make such an absurd statement as to predict disaster within 4 years.

  20. Re:Be a scientist and look at the data by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 2

    Which race is massively over represented in prison? It isn't Asians.

    Americans. At least the last time I checked.

    --
    Ezekiel 23:20
  21. Re:Be a scientist and look at the data by gbjbaanb · · Score: 2

    And now we see how surveys are conducted

    "Not the reputable ones no, but there aren't many of those" - Sir Humphrey Appleby

  22. Global warming = doomsday? by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 2

    you have to wonder why anyone would put any stock in it.

    Especially given that they now track global warming. Nuclear war is a doomsday scenario but global warming is most certainly not. It may cause economic hardship and the displacement of populations as sea levels rise plus the need to alter crops etc. but it is not going to wipe humanity off the face of the earth. Since the clock is supposedly set by scientists if they can be so wrong about something scientific then I have little faith they can predict the likelihood of nuclear war either given that this depends on politics.

  23. Re:Be a scientist and look at the data by tmosley · · Score: 2, Informative

    I'd say it has more to do with the way the human brain processes skin color than poverty (blacks account for most of the prison population even accounting for socioeconomic status) or "race" (there really isn't such a thing--more genetic diversity in the human population of Africa than the rest of the world combined). Dark skinned (not just black Africans) people as a whole will, over the long term, always wind up making up the bulk of the population of the lowest tier of society, no matter which society they are in. Studies on young children show that the brain associates darker skin with masculinity, aggressiveness, and misbehavior, while white skin is associated with good behavior, trustworthiness, and femininity.

    Following this line of thought leads to a societal setup that, when compared to history, has created the only successful black societies--segregation. Places like Harlem and Greentown were successful prior to integration (or their total destruction in the face of the prospect of integration), as were civilizations like Nubia, Mali, and Great Zimbabwe, which successfully traded with civilizations populated by lighter skinned peoples.

    Many of the problems associated with dark skinned people around the world can thus likely be attributed to societal feedback loops (self-fulfilling prophesies) and brain drain, where the best and brightest "get out of the ghetto" rather than taking charge of the ghetto and making it a better place. Of course, many black societies also have their own cultural problems (corruption in Africa, anti-intellectualism in America, for example), but those don't explain the more widespread effect, and the fact that SKIN COLOR in and of itself is the most powerful predictor of IQ, no matter whether you are looking at America, India, Africa, Australia, or anywhere else.

    If you think this post is racist, then you think reality is racist and there is nothing I can do for you.

  24. Re:Be a scientist and look at the data by ColdWetDog · · Score: 2

    Which sex has the most deadbeat fathers?

    Is this a trick question? Something from Common Core?

    Was I left behind as a child?

    --
    Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
  25. Re:More Global Warming Alarmism!!!!!!!! by dave420 · · Score: 2

    Amongh many other things, with carbon credits you get less CO2 pumped into the atmosphere, giving humanity more time to come up with a solution, and a method of partially funding it at the same time. It would help you to know what you're complaining about before doing so, in order to differentiate you from some ignorant talk radio listener railing against whatever his chosen broadcaster hates this week. I know it's tempting to post pithy one-liners in order to try to make a point, but when the one liners merely illustrate your lack of understanding, it's not particularly beneficial to the discussion, or to you, to do so.