5 THINGS ABOUT DOOMSDAY CLOCK.
The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists is moving the Doomsday Clock up to 100 seconds to midnight — midnight being a metaphor for the end of the world — in a recognition of growing threats from nuclear war, climate change and disinformation. The clock had been at two minutes to midnight since 2018. Here’s what prompted the change.
1 NOBODY’S DOING ANYTHING
The Bulletin’s president warned Thursday of influential leaders who “denigrate and discard the most effective methods for addressing complex threats.” The group’s reasoning has traditionally focused on the availability of nuclear weapons and a willingness among the world’s great powers to use them but this year there are new concerns — including the prospect of a deal limiting Iran’s nuclear development falling apart.
2 NORTH KOREA VOWS SOMETHING
In North Korea there’s been “no real progress” despite fanfare over talks. And North Korean leader Kim Jong Un has promised to demonstrate a new weapon.
3 EARTH ALARM
There’s growing concern about the state of the planet. The Bulletin warned in 2007 that the threat of climate change is “nearly as dire” as the dangers of nuclear weapons.
4 FAKE NEWS
And those twin problems are now “compounded by a threat multiplier, cyber-enabled information warfare, that undercuts society’s ability to respond.” It said many governments have used disinformation campaigns over the past year to “sow distrust in institutions and among nations.”
5 NEW ABNORMAL
The clock, a metaphorical measure for humankind’s proximity to destruction, has wavered between two and 17 minutes to the apocalypse since its inception in 1947. The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists was founded by veterans of the Manhattan Project who were concerned about the consequences of their nuclear research. Last year, the clock didn’t budge, remaining at two minutes to midnight after advancing 30 seconds in 2018. It had advanced 30 seconds in 2017 but did not move in 2016. Bulletin president Rachel Bronson said the clock’s lack of movement reflected a “new abnormal” and “should not be taken as a sign of stability but as a stark warning.”