26th January, 1:30 PM EST
http://clock.thebulletin.org/2016
There is possibility they will reset the clock, as the situation gets shittier, and [OPs opinion] setting it to 23:59 would cause panic.
>>19300
What's all this then?
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)
>>19308
>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 are the odds the end of the world is tomorrow?!
>>19308
> there was a mix of good (environmental talks in Paris)
A bunch of globalist bullshitters convening to talk about a made up problem is anything but good.
>>19300
the doomsday clock lost its relevance when they started including climate stuff
bunch of liberal circlejerking now
>>19323
Pretty unlikely. Gas is below a dollar somewhere in the US.
>>19308
What? The closest we've ever been to nuclear war was 1995, the only time the Russians actually opened their nuclear football.
>>19323
the chance of throwing three million coins and becoming poor
Whats going on?
>>19300
fake and gay
>>19524
The Bulletin says the best way to move the clock back is to dramatically reduce spending on nuclear weapons programs
like what???
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.
>>19574
It was a warning to countries in the Cold War that nuclear weapons shouldn't be messed around with. Ever since then it's been irrelevant.
What are the odds of the human race going extinct in the next thousand years? Please don't tell me 100%.
>>19579
50/50, either it does or it doesn't
>>19580
Thanks Mike
>>19579
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.
>>19596
All out nuclear war would do the trick. Only prepared survivalists could survive (underground)
Doomsday clock always felt trumped up to me.. Hurrr durrr I moved the minute hand, clearly time to start panicing if you haven't already
>>19602
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.
>>19615
No wait - CERN going Big Bang... Yeah that'll do us all in!
>>19604
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.
>>19323
50%
Either it happens or doesn't.
>>19602
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
>>19324
>science
>made up
kek. Did your Sky Wizard tell you that?
>>19300
I'm going to laugh hysterically when these idiotic hippies finally set the clock to 00:00 and fucking nothing happens other than them making a speech about how awful we all are.
>>19300
Not this shit again.
>>19300
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xy8v-AAT0GY&feature=youtu.be
>>19596
Solar storms and any of the overdue super volcanoes are a few that come to mind - especially the solar flare.
>>19531
What about that is confusing you?
>>19576
>Ever since then itws been irrelevant.
Not culturally, which is why they still use it and why it's news of a sort.
>>19602
>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?
seems like a temper tantrum.
somebody just wants attention.
They inflated the value up, somehow right now is more dangerous than being on the brink of MAD