26th January, 1:30 PM EST
There is possibility they will reset the clock, as the situation gets shittier, and [OPs opinion] setting it to 23:59 would cause panic.
But what's the chance it would be 23:59?
The closest the world ever got to midnight was the 1963 cuban missile crisis, which was two minutes away. Right now we're at 3 minutes, and I predict that it will not change because within the past 12 months there was a mix of good (environmental talks in Paris) and bad (ISIS attacks, North Korea's potential A-bomb testing). Also, I think current circumstances do not justify moving the clock to 23:58, if the only other circumstance was the cuban missile crisis. At least right now we are not in a nuclear arms race... (rather, we are engaged in a series of overlapping proxy wars in the middle east, but that's another story)
>But what's the chance it would be 23:59?
If Trump or Hillary get elected then it probably would. After people realize that their probably not going to start a war, then it will move back 4 or 5 minutes. It's just like Reagan and Carter.
What is the nuclear clock based on? To me it sounds like just an opinion of a bunch of scientists. I don't know anything about it but it sounds dumb. It could be 23:59 and mean absolutely nothing. If I'm wrong please correct me.
I was gonna say 0% but an act of God could still wreck the earth like its done before. Man made events are still to weak to destroy the world. The collapse of civilizations, and the death of billions is possible, but to say we have the power to kill all humans on earth is just idiotic.
I still disagree, people often forget how widespread humanity is. Even though the sum of human knowledge and civilization might be destroyed, I still think there would be people living in isolated areas that would be unaffected. People living high in the Himalayas wouldn't worry about a direct hit, and weather patterns protect from fallout. Similar ideas with those in the amazon or Pacific islands. And then there's all the people standard inbetween. Cruise ships and airliners could just be in the right place at the right time, and could reach some of these locations to perhaps preserve some knowledge in these new cradles of civilizations. Even without these preserves of old knowledge, these societies have lasted thousands of years, and could last more then enough time for fallout to dissipate and reclaim the earth. Humans have been through tough shit, and while civilizations crumple, man keeps on.
Agreed. If they were in any way accurate then the world would look dystopian by the time the minute hand was at 10 minutes to midnight. 5 minutes would be an unlivable cesspool so noone would even care about the clock by then.
Nah me and my friends did some research read the Kearny report amongst others with the vastly reduced nuclear weapons count of the 21st centuray a nuclear war is quite survivable even winnable for the west. Think of it this way Russia has roughly 4K nukes to hit all of NATO and friends with . NATO and friends has way more than 4K military bases and major cities not to mention a missile defense system. Radiation won't be a problem Hiroshima and Nagasaki proved that when we detonated atomic devices which are many times worse than hydrogen bombs with regards to fallout generation we saw people moving back in to the cities with in 3 months. Worse case situation cancer levels spike by 35 percent for 40 years then return to prewar rate. Nothing to worry about really. Now biological weapons that could really wipe us out
>only prepared survivalists could survive
That's still Humans surviving so doesn't count.
I also doubt we have enough nukes to evenly bake the Earth's surface. Honestly though, who would want to nuke the poles? Angry anti-eskimos?