© T.W., ShutterstockThe Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists has reset the "Doomsday Clock" to 5 minutes before midnight, a minute closer to humanity's imminent destruction, symbolized by "midnight," than last year.
In a sign of pessimism about humanity's future, scientists today set the hands of the infamous "Doomsday Clock" forward one minute from two years ago.
"It is now five minutes to midnight," Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists (BAS) director Kennette Benedict announced today (Jan. 10) at a press conference in Washington, D.C.
That represents a symbolic step closer to doomsday, a change from the clock's previous mark of six minutes to midnight, set in January 2010.
The clock is a symbol of the threat of humanity's imminent destruction from nuclear or biological weapons, climate change and other human-caused disasters. In making their deliberations about how to update the clock's time, the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists focused on the current state of nuclear arsenals around the globe, disastrous events such as the Fukushima nuclear meltdown, and biosecurity issues such as the creation of an airborne H5N1 flu strain.
The Doomsday Clock came into being in 1947 as a way for atomic scientists to warn the world of the dangers of nuclear weapons. That year, the Bulletin set the time at seven minutes to midnight, with midnight symbolizing humanity's destruction. By 1949, it was at three minutes to midnight as the relationship between the United States and the Soviet Union deteriorated. In 1953, after the first test of the hydrogen bomb, the doomsday clock ticked to two minutes until midnight.
Comment: No mention of the fact that it is corrupt science that has gotten us into this mess.
The past 100 years have witnessed an explosion in knowledge of hundreds - if not thousands - of new subjects, leading to such complexity that it requires an army of specialized scientists and research budgets equal to the national budgets of some countries. Ordinary people, no matter how well-educated, have been left behind, unable to engage the impenetrable cloud of complicated ideas that are intelligible only in parts, and only to the "right experts." If we lived in a world where things were going well, where hunger and resource disparity were not so great, perhaps this wouldn't matter. But we live in a world where the technology developed by so-called scientific progress impacts us every day in our ordinary lives. There are concerns about the toxicity of our food sources, manipulated by genetic engineering. There are concerns about the genetic manipulation of human reproduction. There are concerns about the increasing dominance of the pharmaceutical industry on health. There are concerns about the sociological implications of behavior control via a global dominating mass media. There are concerns that science is in bed with power and is being used to the detriment of humanity at large. And the obvious consequence of these perceptions among the masses of ordinary people is an anti-Science backlash. This reaction is directed not just at governments and multi-national companies that employ the scientists, but against the scientists and Science, itself.
Scientists are generally reluctant to come forward and talk about this; it's as bad for the career as investigating a non-material Cosmos. So, when scientists don't band together and really police their profession and interface with the people they are supposed to be serving, the public is left to the mercies of tabloid hysteria.