Slashdot Mirror


The Doomsday Clock Just Ticked Closer To Midnight (usatoday.com)

Scientists moved the hands of the symbolic "Doomsday Clock" closer to midnight on Thursday amid increasing worries over nuclear weapons and climate change. From a report: The clock is now two minutes to midnight. "Because of the extraordinary danger of the current moment, the Science and Security Board today moves the minute hand of the Doomsday Clock 30 seconds closer to catastrophe," said Rachel Bronson, president of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. "This is the closest the Clock has ever been to Doomsday, and as close as it was in 1953, at the height of the Cold War." Each year, the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, a non-profit group that sets the clock, decides whether the events of the previous year pushed humanity closer or farther from destruction. The symbolic clock is now the closest it's been to midnight since 1953. It was also two minutes to midnight in 1953 when the hydrogen bomb was first tested.

24 of 319 comments (clear)

  1. Damn! by PPH · · Score: 4, Funny

    I thought it was almost lunchtime.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
    1. Re:Damn! by dejitaru · · Score: 5, Funny

      I think you mean launchtime

    2. Re:Damn! by spth · · Score: 5, Funny

      It's just his autocorrection: https://xkcd.com/1834/ Philipp

  2. Scientists my foot by RightwingNutjob · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Attention-seeking peaceniks is more like it.

    1. Re:Scientists my foot by HornWumpus · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Their credibility has been gone for a _long_ time. Should be ignored.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    2. Re:Scientists my foot by richardellisjr · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Considering they believe we are closer to doomday now that we were during the Cuban missile crisis I'd say your spot on.

    3. Re:Scientists my foot by servo335 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Free trade? i cite Rule of acquisition #34 War is good for business

    4. Re:Scientists my foot by RightwingNutjob · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Reagan used to say that freedom isn't passed down through the blood; it must be taught to the next generation. Same thing with loonie left nonsense like this. They'll keep talking, so we have to keep refuting them. The antidote to bad ideas in the public sphere is good ideas in the public sphere. Jordan Peterson and Cathy Newman is a perfect example.

    5. Re:Scientists my foot by penandpaper · · Score: 3, Funny

      So what your saying is that you hate brown people and women?

    6. Re:Scientists my foot by k6mfw · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Nothing wrong protesting against actions of billionaires hellbent on starting wars where someone else's children has to fight them.

      --
      mfwright@batnet.com
    7. Re:Scientists my foot by Bootsy+Collins · · Score: 3, Informative

      predominantly scientists who played prominent roles in the Manhattan Project during WW2.

      WW2 ended in 1945 and everybody of prominence back then is long dead.

      Not sure how that pertains to my answer to your question; but yes, the Manhattan Project (or its precursor) scientists involved in the creation of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists -- Rabinowitch, Szilard, Oppenheimer, Bethe, Urey, etc. -- are gone now, although a few survived until relatively recently (Hans Bethe, for instance, did not pass until 2005).

      But even if they were alive, try explaining, why their role in the development of the weapon makes them better experts on matters of foreign policy, military, and psychology, than that of any engineer or a dentist?

      Why, in other words, should we value their opinion on how imminent the use of their weapon is over that of an engineer or a dentist?

      Do you think, bladesmiths could better predict the imminence of duels, than other contemporaries?

      I don't know why you're asking me these questions, since I merely answered the one you posed (about what the basis for the name was), and made no assertions of the sort that your questions seem to imply or defenses of anything the Bulletin has ever published.

      The so-called "Doomsday Clock" is undoubtedly the most notorious thing about the Bulletin; but it's a tiny fraction of what they publish and what they argue. In general, and from my experience, the papers/articles published therein which argue for any particular viewpoint on an issue tend to be supported with attempts at logical reasoning built upon a set of claimed evidence. That absolutely does not make any of them right, any more than the many papers that fill scientific journals every week are all correct; and it's completely reasonable to argue that one sees flaws in their reasoning or in the set of facts/axioms/whatever on which their reasoning is based; and I'd be very surprised if any of the principals involved in the publication now, or those who write for it, would argue to the contrary.

  3. Doomsday Clocks are Stupid by avandesande · · Score: 4, Insightful

    They are a graphic for about a half dozen logic fallacies.

    --
    love is just extroverted narcissism
  4. It's closer now than during Cuban Missile Crisis? by geschbacher79 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think this idea of the Doomsday clock being soooo close to midnight reveals just how useless a measurement of crisis it actually is. They're suggesting that a global nuclear holocaust has never been more likely? More likely than during the Cuban Missile Crisis? Than when the president of China urged President Nixon to join him in nuking Russia? Closer than when Pakistan and India took turns testing nukes underground in the early 2000's? All of those years of the cold war where both the US and USSR had nuclear-armed bombers flying all around?

    The only location where a nuclear event is likely to take place would be in North Korea: If any event took place, it would have to be a limited attack by the North Korea, prompting a US response. But that isn't to suggest an entire global nuclear winter would necessarily follow.

    This is nothing but attention-seeking for the organization behind the clock and in no way measures the actual threat of a nuclear doomsday.

  5. Why wasn't the Cold War worse, again? by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 5, Insightful

    >> This is the closest the Clock has ever been to Doomsday, and as close as it was in 1953, at the height of the Cold War

    Hmmm...2 away minutes = global nuclear destruction in 1953 but 2 away minutes = incremental climate changes and a possible limited exchange (over North Korea, etc.) in 2018. Why are the goalposts moving?

    1. Re:Why wasn't the Cold War worse, again? by geek · · Score: 4, Insightful

      They don't like Trump. He says mean things. Therefor, doomsday is approaching. Typical leftist hysteria

    2. Re:Why wasn't the Cold War worse, again? by pastafazou · · Score: 3, Insightful

      So now the potential of a couple of degrees of warming over the next half century is equivalent to mutually assured destruction at the hands of two antagonistic nuclear superpowers? Keep sipping that kool-aid...

  6. To hell with it. by jwhyche · · Score: 5, Funny

    To hell with this 2 minutes and 2 seconds to midnight. Lets just roll the damn thing right on up to midnight and see what happens! Common Hippies, make my day! Lets set that fucker right on midnight!.

    --
    I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
    1. Re:To hell with it. by jwhyche · · Score: 4, Funny

      I think we should live dangerously. Lets set the damn thing 2 minutes PAST midnight and see what happens.

      --
      I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
  7. Re:Cuban Missile Crisis by magarity · · Score: 5, Funny

    There was a Democrat in the White House then. It tracks closer to midnight when a Republican is there and further when a Democrat is. It should be named the Liberal Angst Clock.

  8. Re:It's closer now than during Cuban Missile Crisi by alvinrod · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think that their problem is that they continually wanted to protest some action and kept pushing the clock closer, only now they've run out of room and look damned foolish because all of these little political statements have add up to what we see now. As you point out when you look at it in a historical context, it makes you roll your eyes quite a bit.

    They clearly need to walk the clock back quite a bit and do so periodically when whatever new thing they're worried about fails to come to pass or lead to new cause for concern.

  9. Re:It's closer now than during Cuban Missile Crisi by TheCastro1689 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Pretty sure they also use it for climate change and other crazy shit instead of just nuclear war.

  10. Re:It's closer now than during Cuban Missile Crisi by nealric · · Score: 4, Funny

    It's kind of like when your teacher/parent demanded you do something by the time they counted down from 10. But when you still hadn't done it by the time they got to 1, they started with ever smaller fractions.

  11. Re:It's closer now than during Cuban Missile Crisi by dj245 · · Score: 3, Informative

    I think that their problem is that they continually wanted to protest some action and kept pushing the clock closer, only now they've run out of room and look damned foolish because all of these little political statements have add up to what we see now. As you point out when you look at it in a historical context, it makes you roll your eyes quite a bit. They clearly need to walk the clock back quite a bit and do so periodically when whatever new thing they're worried about fails to come to pass or lead to new cause for concern.

    It's even more foolish now. The Koreans are talking to each other, the US has postponed their military exercises in Korea until after the Olympics, and the proxy wars in the Middle East are not as hot as they were a year ago. Ukraine and Crimea have "calmed down" in the sense that nobody in the USA cares anymore.

    If anything, they should be setting the clock backwards.

    --
    Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
  12. Re:DoomedByU by penandpaper · · Score: 3, Insightful

    And the cherry, the US, the Country FOUNDED on the principles of freedom, drops to 21....well done....
    http://theweek.com/speedreads/... [theweek.com]

    I have a hard time taking any analysis that ranks Germany, Canada, and the UK above the US. Hate speech laws. Arrests for tweets and facebook posts. Compelled speech... Not exactly bastions of personal freedom and civil rights. Any report that thinks countries that employ those laws are free are delusional and fundamentally flawed in their analysis.

    I honestly would not trade my citizenship of the US for with any other nation on Earth. The US has it's problems no doubt but the protections for individual liberty are still foundational. I can say what I want and I can defend my right to say it myself without the government.