The Doomsday Clock has been moved to 5 minutes to midnight. Apparently the Doomsday Clock has been updated to modern times and reflects not only the threat of nuclear terrorism, but also gloabl warming. Wasn’t life during the Cold War a much simpler time?
By the way, the closest the DC has ever been to midnight is in 1953, at two minutes, after the US and Soviet Union each tested hydrogen bombs. Remember that Iron Maiden song? Those guys totally rock…
- BROWSE / IN TIMELINE
- « All aboard!
- » A strange encounter…
COMMENTS / 6 COMMENTS
Travis Gosselin added these pithy words on 18 Jan 07 at 10:26 amStephen Hawking has a point and he’s not afraid to use it. Without an immediate and positive action taken towards our environment, our home planet may be toast. Over the past several months, scientists have been predicting the time when the ice caps will melt to be earlier and earlier; So there’s no way of telling whether or not this will affect our current generation. Either way, someone will have to pick up the tab for our inaction”¦Say “Ëœbabies’ ten times fast!
Our perpetual presence in Iraq has had quite an impact on global priorities, if not directly, then indirectly through distraction. If our economic and human resources keep being squandered on oil-bent wars, which kill thousands of potential America-lovers, how can there be peace? I’m sure President Bush will claim to his grave that oil was only an after-thought to him, but let’s be honest”¦we’re creating enemies for energy over there.
Certainly, the American Nuclear Monopoly doesn’t help the fact that everyone and their neighboring country hates us; and with Iran and North Korea drooling over the power dish, there’s no telling how far they’ll go to keep their technology.
If there’s ever going to be any trend-bending, our government has to change their way of thinking and find a more efficient energy source. The exportation of non-petrol/non-nuclear energy would provide thousands of jobs and billions of dollars to further strengthen our economy, as well as our neighbors’. Along with that little booster, Iran would no longer have an excuse to enrich uranium”¦wouldn’t that be a trick?
“We foresee great peril if governments and societies don’t take action now to offset climate change”¦it is now five to midnight.”Â?
-Stephen Hawking
Pius Aeneas added these pithy words on 18 Jan 07 at 6:45 pmFrankly, I think the Doomsday Clock is pure rubbish. The moment it became necessary to move the hands backwards, it should have been obvious that a ‘clock’ analogy wasn’t the best way to go. The whole purpose of an analogy is to represent a complex process using a similar but much simpler process that can be more easily understood. International relations in the nuclear age is complicated enough without also having to contemplate time travel, all because a clock graphic makes for a good magazine cover.
I think, perhaps, that the clock analogy was based on the somewhat ideological assumption that with the initial creation of nuclear weapons, mankind was placed on an irrevocable downward slope (or ballistic trajectory, more appropriately) towards nuclear annihilation. This, of course, did not turn out to be the case, and renders the clock analogy something of an anachronism.
Also, the inclusion of ‘climate change’ (whatever happened to ‘global warming’ anyway?) in their criteria smacks of mission creep. Now, I know scientists tend to be concerned with environmental issues, but Stephen Hawking is no more qualified to comment on the Earth’s climate than Carl Sagan was when he predicted that the Kuwaiti oil fires would lead to catastrophic global cooling.
Public Agenda added these pithy words on 18 Jan 07 at 8:05 pmPeople were pretty anxious about world affairs even before the Doomsday Clock moved up—Public Agenda’s Foreign Policy Anxiety Indicator (http://publicagenda.com/foreignpolicy/foreignpolicy_sidebar.htm) stands at 130 on a 200-point scale. Eight in 10 Americans say they worry about a terrorist attack using biological, chemical or nuclear weapons (47 percent worry “a lot”). The public also gives the government mediocre grades for stopping the spread of nuclear weapons. Even fewer give the government high marks for fighting global warming.
Check it out at:
http://publicagenda.com/foreignpolicy/foreignpolicy_sidebar.htm
snow added these pithy words on 19 Jan 07 at 4:11 am“which kill thousands of potential America-lovers,”
These people are potential America-lovers? How do you figure that? It seems that no matter what we do, we will be hated over there. The idea that if we didn’t start a war or just sat back and quietly took the oil would make them love us, is ridiculous. What if we were able to stop using Middle Eastern oil and left the region completely? Would this make them love us? They would still find a reason to hate us, such as our support of Israel (and sorry, we can’t throw all of our principles out the window-ditch an ally, Israel-to make them ‘love’ us). For those who think the US has gone about everything in the wrong way in the ME, in the past as well as the present, what non-utopian suggestions do you have to the problems we face in the region?
“we’re creating enemies for energy over there.”
“our government has to change their way of thinking and find a more efficient energy source”
Leftist canards galore. If you have any real solutions to our addiction to oil, please let us know. Oil is not going to be replaced as the main source of energy in the world in the near future (2030 to 2050) no matter what anybody does. The Bush administration is at least going in the right direction in saying that the only feasible approach is multiple sources of energy, including nuclear, renewables, coal-to-liquid, etc. We don’t just use oil to power our cars, it is used in the production of an astonishing array of everyday products in our lives. Oil is not going to be replaced any time soon.
“Even fewer give the government high marks for fighting global warming.”
What exactly should governments be doing to fight global warming? The sensationalism surrounding global warming is going far beyond our ability to come up with any large solutions. There may be many small things we can do, and these things are being done to a greater or lesser degree, but if anyone has a non-utopian solution that will be effective, I’d love to hear it. Unfortunately, the Kyoto Protocol is not it. It will cost trillions and have a minimal effect, at best.
von Kaufman-Turkestansky added these pithy words on 20 Jan 07 at 8:34 am“... A prime time Belsen feast”...? What poets Iron Maiden are!
Kurt9 added these pithy words on 20 Jan 07 at 10:17 pmI’ve never paid attention to this “doomsday” clock. This stuff is rubbish.
If global warming is real, it will be beneficial, not bad for us and our economy. A warmer wealthier planet is much preferable to a cooler, poorer one. Man-caused global warming is probably the only thing keeping us out of the next ice age (which based on the milakanovich cycles, should start happening quite soon).
Terrorists could certainly detonate a nuclear device, maybe even a few nuclear devices. However, this certainly is not the existential threat that full scale nuclear with the Rooskies in the 70’s or 80’s would have been.
Short of a major impact (asteriod or comet), civilization has become largely “crash-proof”. Islamic jihadism is the boogieman threat of the looney right, global warming is the boogieman threat of the looney left. Both the right and the left are simply angling to undermine your personal and economic freedoms. It is best to simply ignore them.
