5 Minutes to Midnight

**Kärnfysikern** · 01-18-2007, 10:36 AM

http://www.thebulletin.org/weekly-hi...highlight.html

This deteriorating state of global affairs leads the Board of Directors of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists--in consultation with a Board of Sponsors that includes 18 Nobel laureates--to move the minute hand of the “Doomsday Clock” from seven to five minutes to midnight.

The five NPT-recognized nuclear weapon states have failed in their obligation to make serious strides toward disarmament--most notably, the United States and Russia, which still possess 26,000 of the 27,000 nuclear warheads in the world. By far the greatest potential for calamity lies in the readiness of forces in the United States and Russia to fight an all-out nuclear war. Whether by accident or by unauthorized launch, these two countries are able to initiate major strikes in a matter of minutes. Each warhead has the potential destructive force of 8 to 40 times that of the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima, Japan, on August 6, 1945. In that relatively small nuclear explosion, 100,000 people were killed and a city destroyed; 50 of today’s nuclear weapons could kill 200 million people.

Sixteen years after the end of the Cold War, following substantial reductions in nuclear weapons by the United States and Russia, the two major powers have now stalled in their progress toward deeper reductions in their arsenals. Equally worrisome, the United States, in its 2002 Nuclear Posture Review, declared that nuclear weapons “provide credible military options to deter a wide range of threats,” including chemical and biological weapons, as well as “surprising military developments.” In early 2004, this new concept, which espouses the quick use of even nuclear weapons to destroy “time urgent targets,” was put into operation. That the United States--a nation with unmatched superiority in conventional weapons--would place renewed emphasis on the need for nuclear weapons suggests to other nations that such arsenals are necessary to their security.

The terrible and still unprecedented destructive power of nuclear weapons led Albert Einstein to observe, “With nuclear weapons, everything has changed, save our way of thinking.” As we stand at the brink of a second nuclear age and at the onset of an era of unprecedented climate change, our way of thinking about the uses and control of technologies must change to prevent unspeakable destruction and future human suffering.

The Clock is ticking.

**Fat Guy** · 01-18-2007, 10:52 AM

I just read this on cnn… scary stuff!

**Fat Guy** · 01-18-2007, 10:56 AM

Here is the link:

http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/science...eut/index.html

**mcpeepants** · 01-18-2007, 11:32 AM

whats the point of a doomsday clock for nukes. it seems like is just frightening people instead of doing something. the clock would make sense for a asteroid that is about to hit the earth so people could decide what to do with the rest off their life. but then again maybe we wouldn't want to know.

**singern** · 01-18-2007, 12:20 PM

Originally Posted by mcpeepants

whats the point of a doomsday clock for nukes. it seems like is just frightening people instead of doing something. the clock would make sense for a asteroid that is about to hit the earth so people could decide what to do with the rest off their life. but then again maybe we wouldn't want to know.

It has been done throughout history.
Religion was and still is used to keep people in line, by the threat of hell, or some other afterlife punishment.
Dictators use the threat of violence, torture and death to keep people in line.
So now we have a group of Doomsday fearmongers using the threat of Nuclear holocaust.

Take it all wit a grain of salt and move on with life.

**Kärnfysikern** · 01-18-2007, 12:41 PM

Originally Posted by singern

It has been done throughout history.
Religion was and still is used to keep people in line, by the threat of hell, or some other afterlife punishment.
Dictators use the threat of violence, torture and death to keep people in line.
So now we have a group of Doomsday fearmongers using the threat of Nuclear holocaust.

Take it all wit a grain of salt and move on with life.

Hmm well I wouldnt call the bulletin fearmongers. The bulletin was started by Einstein and a few manhattan project scientists. It has always been made up of famous scientists and nobel laurates. Id take what they say very seriously because they, unlike other fearmongers, are experts.

**Kärnfysikern** · 01-18-2007, 12:42 PM

Originally Posted by mcpeepants

whats the point of a doomsday clock for nukes. it seems like is just frightening people instead of doing something. the clock would make sense for a asteroid that is about to hit the earth so people could decide what to do with the rest off their life. but then again maybe we wouldn't want to know.

the clock just started as a nice way to show the danger of nuclear war in one of the bulletins first editions and later stuck around to become the main symbol of the bulletin.

Its not suposed to symbolise a invetiable disaster, its more like a warning that we are this close to disaster unless we do something.

**Kärnfysikern** · 01-18-2007, 12:46 PM

I cant say I like how they now set the clock because of global warming. It seems to speculative. Nuclear war was during the cold war a very real and iminent threat. Global warming isnt as tangible and the clock loses its purpose.

**singern** · 01-18-2007, 01:08 PM

Originally Posted by johan

Hmm well I wouldnt call the bulletin fearmongers. The bulletin was started by Einstein and a few manhattan project scientists. It has always been made up of famous scientists and nobel laurates. Id take what they say very seriously because they, unlike other fearmongers, are experts.

No one respects Einstein more than I but, Unless they have a magic crystal ball or are able to give me lotto numbers, I find it difficult to take them seriously. The world is always in some sort of danger, be it natural, or man made,
but how where and when is as much a mystery as this issue at hand.

**Kärnfysikern** · 01-18-2007, 01:14 PM

Originally Posted by singern

No one respects Einstein more than I but, Unless they have a magic crystal ball or are able to give me lotto numbers, I find it difficult to take them seriously. The world is always in some sort of danger, be it natural, or man made,
but how where and when is as much a mystery as this issue at hand.

Well I dont see there mission as trying to tell the future. But they sure are a credible voice of warning. I dont think they usualy get caught up in hypes.

But I guess they have lost there role after the cold war ended. Atleast mankind isnt at risk of beeing destroyed anymore even though nuclear terrorism is a danger.

**singern** · 01-18-2007, 01:20 PM

Originally Posted by johan

Well I dont see there mission as trying to tell the future. But they sure are a credible voice of warning. I dont think they usualy get caught up in hypes.

But I guess they have lost there role after the cold war ended. Atleast mankind isnt at risk of beeing destroyed anymore even though nuclear terrorism is a danger.

Look Johan, Dont get me wrong. I certainly believe the danger is very real and I believe it to be a critical issue which our governments need to address immediately,
but the idea of the "CLOCK" makes it very difficult to take them seriously. kind of like Green Peace.

**Kärnfysikern** · 01-18-2007, 01:24 PM

Originally Posted by singern

Look Johan, Dont get me wrong. I certainly believe the danger is very real and I believe it to be a critical issue which our governments need to address immediately,
but the idea of the "CLOCK" makes it very difficult to take them seriously. kind of like Green Peace.

Ohh I see, I thought you have a problem with there mission so to speak, not just the symbolism.

The clock is a bit corny yeah. It might have been good in the 60's. But today its not.

**singern** · 01-18-2007, 01:31 PM

Originally Posted by johan

Ohh I see, I thought you have a problem with there mission so to speak, not just the symbolism.

The clock is a bit corny yeah. It might have been good in the 60's. But today its not.

Exactly right, Perhaps if they had a better more realistic method of conveying there message......

**Kärnfysikern** · 01-18-2007, 01:34 PM

Originally Posted by singern

Exactly right, Perhaps if they had a better more realistic method of conveying there message......

Well I think its hard to get anything through to people nowdays. If they where completely academic and dry they would never be mentioned to the mtv generation of today.

Over the top scaremongering seems the only way to ever get into media nowdays and they are fortunaly to serious to do that.

If it cant be summed up in 5 words or with a nice picture nobody today bother to read