2.5 Minutes to Midnight

Post Reply New Topic

I thank you for your kind words... Could you tell me perhaps, what is your reaction to the writing itself? The message I put forward? I assume you read the entire exposition.. thanks in advance!

From http://thebulletin.org/doomsday-clockwork8052:

How incredibly scientific.



So what does it measure? Worry and fear. It then assigns an arbitrary value, informed partially from an arbitrary starting point based on aesthetics, to the degree of worry of those of the Bulletin who turn the hands (well, hand technically).

And I just heard that the world is going to end during the big solar eclipse this summer on the 70th anniversary of the founding of Israel.

Another headache.

Hey ShyTeddy, I understand what you're saying. I really do.

I just sensed that you were getting a little pessimistic, that's all.

I am really into the geological clock, actually---where the entire period of Man's existence can be said to represent about five minutes to Midnight on a geological clock which started at 12:00:01 AM.

I read the press release, and posted about it in another thread, to much the same response. I skimmed your post, glanced at the comments, and wanted to chime in with some support.

I would have read a little deeper if I had seen anyone disagree in a way to which I could reply, but it is a really long post.

Your writing was fine, OP. Nothing wrong with it.

If people don't have much time, it might be difficult for some to get through it, though.

Just because we don't respond with treatises....doesn't mean we're not capable of producing treatises.

Our responses are not necessarily a reflection of our intelligence.

...You completely missed the point of what I was saying. I never claimed that the world was coming to an end, merely that we have reached an epoch in human history where we are simultaneously capable of destroying ourselves, or acting to avert any crises before they come to fruition. The affects of climate change and what not won't be devastating for a number of years, provided we don't act. My comment was merely a reminder that we're (according to experts in the field of science) edging closer to a man made disaster which we have in our hands the ability to prevent, and a call to arms to use those hands to make this world a better place to live for all of us... I have optimism for mankind otherwise I wouldn't have written all that in the first place. I'm not a harbinger of doom, I should hope to be a harbinger of optimism and hope...

I see a campaign of deliberate obfuscation going on here. This is a comment on the development of this thread, and also on the topic. It tires sincere people, and provokes hotheaded people, but mostly it makes consensus very difficult to find, even when it does appear in a thread.

I've complained about the massive walls of nested snark. It takes at least two people to make one, so there's no way to level blame at only one side of the debate.

You're correct. Nothing resembling logical discourse has taken place. I merely wanted that a few individuals (I wasn't honestly expecting any reception) should read what I wrote, and feel inspired to help others. Instead it's 24+ replies (thus far) which pertain nothing to the content of what I wrote, but merely (and vaguely) the general subject matter; most of which are highly cynical. I wish it were possible to delete the post now

I'd rather see this post deleted and the thread locked as a memorial.

A memorial to what?

Indeed. Here's the full timeline:

1947: 7 minutes to midnight

1949: 3 minutes (-4)



1953: 2 minutes (-1)






1960: 7 minutes (+5)


1963: 12 minutes (+5)




1968: 7 minutes (-5)
1969: 10 minutes (+3)


1972: 12 minutes (+2)

1974: 9 minutes (-3)





1980: 7 minutes (-2)
1981: 4 minutes (-3)


1984: 3 minutes (-1)



1988: 6 minutes (+3)

1990: 10 minutes (+4)
1991: 17 minutes (+7)



1995: 14 minutes (-3)


1998: 9 minutes (-5)



2002: 7 minutes (-2)




2007: 5 minutes (-2)


2010: 6 minutes (+1)

2012: 5 minutes (-1)


2015: 3 minutes (-2)

2017: 2 1/2 minutes (-1/2)

Shyteddy - since you're feeling out of sorts about this whole thread, I'll give what you ask i.e. replies to the points you made in the original post.

Firstly though, you wrote in your latest post 'inspired to help others' - consider the possibility that what you personally consider 'help' others may not consider to be help - or rather, they may have a different view.


Certain points you made:

'Metaphor'. Blurring the lines between science and, well, something else.

Hence many may have doubt.

To say or imply along the lines of 'but it's science' doesn't make it scientific, or pertain to the scientific process.


And, as kraftiekortie has already pertinently mentioned, every generation has its' 'ultimate threat of destruction', be it The Plague, TB, Nazis, Nukes, ISIS etc.

I think this becomes more of a worry for many the older they become as their own death is closer/more present.




There's no reason it should be on everybody's mind. Something being important to you doesn't make it universally important.

Many have enough day-to-day worries i.e. paying bills, getting the kids ready for school, focusing on their education, taking care of older relatives in the latter stages of their life etc

The above may seem slightly facile to you, but for many of us they are very important. As they should be.





1) Proving a metaphorical idea is quite difficult - it would be difficult to say we're at 'that point'
2) There's plenty you can personally do to make a difference. If you drive, give up your car. That would be a good start.

On that front - the likes of Chomsky enjoy having a good complaint about global warming: an interviewer - any interviewer - should simply ask him why he drives a car, and isn't doing so the height of hypocrisy.

The danger of grandiose issues are seeing them as 'the problem of everyone else'.


I encourage you to personally do everything you can to minimise your own impact on the Earth. Which you could start doing now.



Aside from posting on an internet forum, may I ask what you are personally doing about the issue you mention?




Unless you're not born yet, or dead. In which case the most important epoch in human history is yet to come/has already passed.



What differences are you alluding to?



I find when I turn off my TV and don't read newspapers there isn't all that much wrong with the world. Try it for a few months and see how you feel.


Maybe worth reading on the history of the internet.

....It is military.

As are most technological advancements.



We all need somewhere to rest our heads at night.

If you are indifferent to a sense of ownership, consider your reaction if I entered your house and claimed it/your bed as my own.

Would you happily walk away, given it is, after all, only a tiny plot of land on a speck of dust?



Aren't you therefore also an enemy of the human race, given you are proposing an ideology?



Personally, I put a roof over my family's heads, take care of them, contribute to society through my job, pay taxes, take care of older family members, amongst other such 'miniscule' trifles.


This reads like a poor Nietzsche.

I think the complete opposite of what you write. Every man is capable of great change. As an extreme example: any man could kill their neighbour.



This one, and similar ones, always amuse me. Consider the construction/maintenence costs of solar farms/windfarms etc.

Taking windfarms as an example: are you aware of the pollution caused by the smelting process to create turbine blades/parts etc in the first place? Or that the smelting takes place 'somewhere else' (often Africa), not to mention the shipping of parts to various world destinations? The parts can only be shipped as a product of the oil industry - on ships, no less, that only exist as a product of the steel industry.

Solar farms etc aren't made from grass & berries. They are the product of the very systems causing pollution you seem so against.

Shall we sail bamboo turbines across the oceans on birchbark canoes?


Everyone consumes. And it doesn't matter if it's a new lipstick or a copy of Hegel - consumption is consumption.



Ultimately, and as Camus states in The Myth Of Sisyphus, the big question is 'should we choose to stay alive or kill ourselves?'.

Not existing is a good way of minimising impact on the Earth. And adding nutrients to the soil, assuming you go for burial. I'm not advocating it, and if anyone is considering it: you go first

I'm glad I skimmed to the end and caught the Camus reference before going back and reading the whole thing.

People certainly do have things to do, and a lot of interlocutors. To me, the Doomsday Clock works as a metaphor. The first section of the press release sums things up pretty concisely, and explains the history and current choices.

When love is gone, there's always justice. And when justice is gone, there's always force. And when force is gone, there's always Mom. Hi Mom.
-Laurie Anderson