Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Doomsday Clock: Humanity Might Be Edging Closer to Its End

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Doomsday Clock: Humanity Might Be Edging Closer to Its End

    http://edition.cnn.com/2017/01/26/wo...017/index.html

    "(CNN)We are creeping closer to the apocalypse, according to a panel of scientists and scholars.
    The Chicago-based Bulletin of Atomic Scientists has moved the "Doomsday Clock," a symbolic countdown to the end of the world, to two and a half minutes to midnight.
    It marks the first time since 1953 -- after hydrogen bomb tests in the US and then Soviet Union -- that humanity has been this close to global disaster.
    The group cited US President Donald Trump's "disturbing comments" about the use of nuclear weapons and views on climate change among other factors, including cyberthreats and the rise in nationalism, that have contributed to the darkened forecast.
    "The board's decision to move the clock less than a full minute reflects a simple reality: As this statement is issued, Donald Trump has been the US president only a matter of days," the organization said in a statement.
    The emblematic clock had remained at three minutes to midnight for the past two years.
    In a statement released earlier this week, the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists said it was taking a number of recent developments into account.
    "A rise in strident nationalism worldwide, President Donald Trump's comments on nuclear arms and climate issues, a darkening global security landscape that is colored by increasingly sophisticated technology, and a growing disregard for scientific expertise," were among them, it said.
    A team of Nobel laureates at the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists has been compiling research and analysis to set the "Doomsday Clock" since 1945.
    The independent nonprofit group uses data to assess global threats linked to treaty negotiations, geopolitical tensions and developments in the world of technology.
    In 1963, scientists moved the clock back to 12 minutes from seven after US and Soviet leaders signed the Partial Test Ban Treaty, ending all atmospheric nuclear testing.
    The hand reverted to seven minutes from midnight in 1968 as France and China joined the nuclear arms race, and the US became more involved in the Vietnam War.
    However, the pressure eased -- and the clock ticked back -- with the signing of the nuclear non-proliferation treaty in 1970.
    In subsequent years it has swung back and forth -- landing at an alarming three minutes to midnight in 1984 when US-Soviet relations reached a new low -- before swinging back to 17 minutes from midnight in 1991 after the end of the Cold War.
    Since then, it's ticked ever closer to midnight.
    While geopolitical factors feature heavily in this year's evaluation, emerging risks posed by new technologies have also been flagged for the damage they might reap if they fall into the wrong hands.
    These include the rise of artificial intelligence and security threats, including the potential misuse of biotechnology.
    Developments in this industry -- which enables humans to synthesize organisms from scratch -- come with a risk that bio-terrorists will make weapons out of synthetic viruses.
    This would widen an already diverse arsenal of weaponry that threatens to end the world."

  • #2
    stopped reading at "CNN"

    dont read fake news outlets

    Comment


    • #3


      https://youtu.be/9qbRHY1l0vc

      Comment


      • #4
        CNN is the new National Enquirer

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by jas View Post
          stopped reading at "CNN"

          dont read fake news outlets
          If you consider CNN a fake news outlet, then which outlets do you consider real news?

          Breitbart? Which ones?

          Or do you opt to receive your news from the president himself?
          Last edited by TheLennox; 01-27-2017, 05:46 AM.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by TheLennox View Post
            If you consider CNN a fake news outlet, then which outlets do you consider real news?

            Breibart? Which ones?

            Or do you opt to receive your news from the president himself?
            foxnews, foxnews business

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by jas View Post
              foxnews, foxnews business
              Fox is akin to MSNBC in how it has a clear political spin to it. CNN has always been a "neutral" news station, by comparison.

              But you're free to have your own opinion, of course; I'm merely curious as to why you deem CNN to be fake news outlet, as opposed to Fox or MSNBC.

              Is it because they reported on the meeting between Trump and intelligence, as to the sharing of the dossier summary? That was what Trump used to make his claim as to CNN being "fake," at least. What's your reason, if I may ask?

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by TheLennox View Post
                Fox is akin to MSNBC in how it has a clear political spin to it. CNN has always been a "neutral" news station, by comparison.

                But you're free to have your own opinion, of course; I'm merely curious as to why you deem CNN to be fake news outlet, as opposed to Fox or MSNBC.

                Is it because they reported on the meeting between Trump and intelligence, as to the sharing of the dossier summary? That was what Trump used to make his claim as to CNN being "fake," at least. What's your reason, if I may ask?
                propaganda and fear mongering day in day out

                just take earlier this week, what happened to the flynn russia story they ran with ? nothing. and did they report that nothing untoward was found? no. i can go on and on.

                theres a reason why no trump surrogate has been on cnn since kellyanne conway went on there after the russia fake news dossier. cnn will now try and be more fair to trump so members on the trump team agree to go on there and if trump is successful, they will lose viewership if they continue their anti-trump agenda.

                fox news and fox news business has smarter, funnier and more unbiased hosts and guests , and are more informative.
                Last edited by jas; 01-27-2017, 06:10 AM.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by jas View Post
                  propaganda and fear mongering day in day out

                  just take earlier this week, what happened to the flynn russia story they ran with ? nothing. and did they report that nothing untoward was found? no. i can go on and on.

                  theres a reason why no trump surrogate has been on cnn since kellyanne conway went on there after the russia fake news dossier. cnn will now try and be more fair to trump so members on the trump team agree to go on there and if trump is successful, they will lose viewership if they continue their anti-trump agenda.

                  fox news and fox news business has smarter, funnier and more unbiased hosts and guests , and are more informative.
                  CNN only reported that the intelligence agencies handed Trump that summary. That's not fake news because it actually took place.

                  And they acknowledged from the beginning that the information is as of now unsubstantiated.

                  You're free to have your opinion on Fox News, of course, but I've seen Fox News myself and disagree.

                  In my opinion, Fox News was the closest to Breitbart before any such thing existed. I don't like spins that are that heavy when it comes to news. That's also why I never watched MSNBC. I considered it less of a heavy-lean than Fox News, but it was still too present for me to feel it was the best option.

                  The only time I would watch MSNBC was when I would get tired of CNN moderators going out of their way to play devil's advocate as it pertained to issues where Republicans were clearly wrong in. Eventually, it'd get annoying, and I'd feel like listening to the "left" side of things. That didn't last long, however, because I'd quickly enough end up feeling guilty about not getting both sides as much.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by jas View Post
                    stopped reading at "CNN"

                    dont read fake news outlets
                    yeah pretty much the bolded

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X
                    TOP