What is the Doomsday clock? Why did it move closer to global catastrophe? What it means
What is the Doomsday clock? Why did it move closer to global catastrophe? What it means
Show Caption
Hide Caption
'Doomsday Clock' moves one second closer to midnight
The Bulletin of Atomic Scientists moved the Doomsday Clock one second closer to midnight, meaning humanity is closer to destroying itself.
The 2025 Doomsday Clock is ticking closer to midnight than ever before, signaling 'humanity edging closer to catastrophe' according to the Atomic Scientists.
The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists announced on Tuesday the clock now reads 89 seconds to midnight, one second closer than last year. It's the closest it has been since 1947, when the clock was introduced.
Scientists warned in their 2025 Doomsday Clock Statement, the new 2025 Clock time signals that "the world is on a course of unprecedented risk, and that continuing on the current path is a form of madness. The United States, China, and Russia have the prime responsibility to pull the world back from the brink. The world depends on immediate action."
Manpreet Sethi, member of Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists and distinguished fellow at the Centre for Air Power Studies in New Delhi, said in the statement:'The risk of nuclear use continues to grow due to capabilities building up and treaties breaking down. Russia has suspended compliance with the New START treaty and withdrawn ratification of the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty. China is rapidly increasing its nuclear arsenal. And, the US has abdicated its role as a voice of caution. It seems inclined to expand its nuclear arsenal and adopt a posture that reinforces the belief that 'limited' use of nuclear weapons can be managed. Such misplaced confidence could have us stumble into a nuclear war.'
Another member scientist and senior research scholar for cyber policy and security at the Center for International Security and Cooperation, Herb Lin, said AI has the potential to accelerate "chaos and disorder." He expressed concerns over integrating artificial intelligence into weapons of war, raising questions about the "extent to which machines will be allowed to make or support military decisions—even when such decisions could kill on a vast scale."
Here's what to know about the Doomsday Clock and what it means.
What is the Doomsday Clock?
The Doomsday Clock is a metaphor or symbol representing how close humanity is to self-destruction via a human-made global catastrophe according to the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists.
The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists was founded in 1945 by Albert Einstein, J. Robert Oppenheimer and University of Chicago scientists who had helped develop the first nuclear weapons for the Manhattan Project. The group started the Doomsday Clock two years later.
The Clock's original setting in 1947 was seven minutes to midnight. It has since been set backward eight times and forward 18 times. The farthest time from midnight was 17 minutes in 1991, and the nearest is 89 seconds, set in January 2025.
The clock is not actual time, but a hypothetical time that takes into account threats such as climate change, the danger of nuclear weapon disasters, instability in the Middle East, the threat of pandemics, artificial intelligence and mis- and disinformation.
This year's member scientists also expressed concerns over climate change, noting in their statement that '2024 was the hottest year on record. Extreme weather and other climate events—floods, tropical cyclones, extreme heat, drought, and wildfires— devastated societies, rich and poor, as well as ecosystems around the world. Yet the global greenhouse gas emissions that drive climate change continued to rise."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
3 days ago
- Yahoo
Russia sees bleak prospects for expiring nuclear arms pact given 'ruined' ties with US
By Mark Trevelyan (Reuters) -Russia sees little chance of saving its last nuclear accord with the United States, due to expire in eight months, given the "ruined" state of relations with Washington, its top arms control official said in an interview published on Friday. Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov also told TASS news agency that President Donald Trump's proposed Golden Dome missile defence project was a "deeply destabilising" factor creating formidable new obstacles to arms control. His comments were among Moscow's bleakest yet about the prospects for the New START agreement, the last remaining nuclear arms treaty between the two countries, which caps the number of strategic warheads that each side can deploy. President Vladimir Putin in 2023 suspended Russian participation in New START, blaming U.S. support for Ukraine, although he said that Russia would remain within the treaty's limits on warheads, missiles and heavy bomber planes. But if the treaty is not extended or replaced after it expires on February 5 next year, security experts fear it could fuel a new arms race at a time of acute international tension over the conflict in Ukraine, which both Putin and Trump have said could lead to World War Three. The Federation of American Scientists, an authoritative source on arms control, says that if Russia decided to abandon the treaty limits, it could theoretically increase its deployed nuclear arsenal by up to 60% by uploading hundreds of additional warheads. Ryabkov described Russia-U.S. ties as "simply in ruins". "There are no grounds for a full-scale resumption of New START in the current circumstances. And given that the treaty ends its life cycle in about eight months, talking about the realism of such a scenario is increasingly losing its meaning," Ryabkov told TASS. "Of course, deeply destabilising programmes like the Golden Dome - and the U.S. is implementing a number of them - create additional, hard-to-overcome obstacles to the constructive consideration of any potential initiatives in the field of nuclear missile arms control, when and if it comes to that." Trump said last month he had selected a design for the $175-billion Golden Dome project, which aims to block threats from China and Russia by creating a network of satellites, perhaps numbering in the hundreds, to detect, track and potentially intercept incoming missiles. Analysts say the initiative could sharply escalate the militarisation of space, prompting other countries to place similar systems there or to develop more advanced weapons to evade the missile shield. Ryabkov's comments came in the same week that Ukraine stunned Moscow by launching drone strikes on air bases deep inside Russia that house the heavy bomber planes that form part of its nuclear deterrent. Russia has said it will retaliate as and when its military sees fit.
Yahoo
18-05-2025
- Yahoo
Price of US nuclear weapons jumps 25% to nearly $1 trillion by 2034, budget office says
The price to maintain and modernize America's nuclear weapons continues to rise, according to a report from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. According to the April 24 report, U.S. taxpayers will pay approximately $946 billion over the next decade to sustain, operate, and modernize the country's nuclear weapons; its fleet of bombers, submarines and missiles designed to deliver the weapons; and related support and production infrastructure. The projection is 25% − or $190 billion − higher than the CBO's last ten-year cost estimate, which covered 2023 to 2032. More than half of the increase is due to cost overruns, the CBO said. The office pointed to the new Sentinel intercontinental ballistic missile project as a major driver of the jump, in addition to smaller increases in other programs and weapons production facilities run by the National Nuclear Security Administration. Advocates for fewer nuclear weapons pointed to the estimate as a warning about the potential consequences of allowing arms control agreements to quietly expire. But supporters of nuclear modernization contend the U.S. needs an updated arsenal to compete with Russia and China on an increasingly unstable world stage. In a statement, Arms Control Association executive director Daryl Kimball argued the "skyrocketing costs" of the nuclear arsenal are likely to "go even higher." He highlighted that the CBO estimate does not fully account for recently assessed cost increases to the Sentinel program; a mandatory review in 2024 revealed an 81% increase in the program's price tag. Kimball said the administration of President Donald Trump should engage China on arms control and take action to maintain nuclear weapons deployment limits set by the New START treaty with Russia, which expires in early 2026. "Failure to do so will undermine U.S. and global security and could mean that more taxpayer dollars are wasted on weapons of mass destruction rather than programs that meet real human needs," he argued. The CBO bases its estimates on agency budget proposals and accounts for slight cost overruns that align with an agency's historical patterns. The nuclear arsenal and its associated costs represent a growing share of the nation's defense budget, which could soon hit $1 trillion a year. The CBO estimates nukes will account for 8.4% of national defense spending between 2025 and 2034, a significant increase compared with 3.9% in the 2014 defense budget. If you have news tips related to the U.S. nuclear arsenal, please contact Davis Winkie via email at dwinkie@ or via the Signal encrypted messaging app at 770-539-3257. Davis Winkie's role covering nuclear threats and national security at USA TODAY is supported by a partnership with Outrider Foundation and Journalism Funding Partners. Funders do not provide editorial input. This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: US nuclear weapons get more expensive: $1 trillion by 2034
Yahoo
08-05-2025
- Yahoo
Scientists find the best crops to grow during the apocalypse
Yahoo is using AI to generate takeaways from this article. This means the info may not always match what's in the article. Reporting mistakes helps us improve the experience. Yahoo is using AI to generate takeaways from this article. This means the info may not always match what's in the article. Reporting mistakes helps us improve the experience. Yahoo is using AI to generate takeaways from this article. This means the info may not always match what's in the article. Reporting mistakes helps us improve the experience. Generate Key Takeaways When you buy through links on our articles, Future and its syndication partners may earn a commission. Scientists have figured out what crops we'd need to grow in the event of a global catastrophe. . | Credit: Bulgac/Getty Images If a global catastrophe suddenly led to a nuclear winter, millions of people could starve. But now, scientists have figured out what crops we would need to grow to sustain a city if such a calamitous event occurred. According to a new study, farming spinach, sugar beets, wheat and carrots in urban and near-urban areas could feed the population of a midsize city in a post-apocalyptic world. The scientists built on previous research to determine the optimal crops to plant after a global catastrophe — such as nuclear war, extreme pandemics or solar storms. Their goal was to find the most efficient way to feed a person using the least amount of land. "[The research] actually wasn't inspired by the current, you know, geopolitical environment," said study lead author Matt Boyd, founder and research director of Adapt Research, an independent research organization. "But it has turned out to be very relevant, obviously, to the current geopolitical environment," Boyd told Live Science. Current events include unpredictable international politics, ongoing war in the Middle East and Europe, weaponized artificial intelligence and the ever-mounting destruction from climate change. In January, the Doomsday Clock, which indicates how close humanity is to a species-threatening disaster, ticked one second closer to midnight — the closest it has ever been to catastrophe. In the new study, published Wednesday (May 7) in the journal PLOS One , the researchers looked at how the population of a midsize city could survive with agriculture in the event of a global disaster. The study examined two scenarios should disaster strike: what to grow in and around a city under normal climate conditions, and what to grow in the event of a nuclear winter. The optimal crop to grow in a temperate city in normal conditions turned out to be a humble legume: peas. "Peas are a high protein food. They grow well in urban agriculture environments," Boyd said. "If you want to feed someone, growing peas minimizes the amount of land you need to feed that person." However, pea plants are not frost-resistant. In the event of a nuclear winter — which could be caused by nuclear war, a supervolcano eruption or a huge asteroid strike — sunlight would be blocked "due to all the soot and everything that's been thrown up into the stratosphere," Boyd said. This in turn would lead to lower temperatures and make it harder for plants to photosynthesise. In that scenario, a hardier combination of spinach and sugar beets are a better choice, the researchers found. Related: 'Nuclear winter' from a US-Russia conflict would wipe out 63% of the world's population Boyd and study co-author Nick Wilson , a professor of public health at the University of Otago, Wellington came to these conclusions in part by using the data from a meta-analysis of urban agriculture research that analyzed the yield of different crops in dozens of cities around the world. The researchers used Palmerston North in New Zealand as a case study of a midsize city. | Credit:Peas, for example, rose to the top in normal conditions because they require 3,143 square feet (292 square meters) of land to satisfy one person's caloric and protein needs for a year, whereas a combination of cabbage and carrots required 8,364 square feet (777 square meters), said Boyd — almost three times as much land. The researchers chose Palmerston North in New Zealand, but the findings can apply to similar cities worldwide, the researchers said. With a population of roughly 90,000, it's a globally midsize city, Boyd said, plus "it's inland, like many cities around the world, and it has reasonably low density, suburban type housing, not sort of Manhattan-style skyscrapers and so forth." The scientists then used Google imagery of Palmerston North to work out the total amount of available green spaces that could be used to grow crops, such as front lawns, backyards and parks. "Surprise, surprise. The city can't feed all its people," Boyd said. If food is only grown within the city bounds, the available land can feed about 20% of the population with crops that maximize protein and food energy per square foot under normal climate conditions. That number shrinks to about 16% during nuclear winter. To feed the rest of the population, people would need land immediately outside the city — about one-third of the size of the city's built urban area — to sow additional efficient crops. In the case of Palmerston North, that's about 2,817 acres (1,140 hectares), plus another 272 acres (110 hectares) of canola to convert into biodiesel to fuel tractors and other farm machinery. Spinach would help sustain a population during a nuclear winter, researchers found. | Credit: Sally JaneIn the land just outside the city, the study found that potatoes are ideal for a normal climate scenario, and a combination of 97% wheat and 3% carrots is the optimal ratio during a nuclear winter because they have a higher tolerance for colder temperatures. Even in cities, "there is a ton of farmland that can be used to grow food," said Theresa Nogeire-McRae , a landscape ecologist at American Farmland Trust and affiliate faculty at Oregon State University, who was not involved in the study. 'People settled cities where they did for a good reason,' Nogeire-McRae told Live Science. 'It was the rich soil near riverbanks. It's a good commodity. Let's not throw that away." She added that the methods of study were sound and the findings were reasonable. Related stories —14 of the deadliest natural disasters in history —Atlantic ocean currents are weakening — and it could make the climate in some regions unrecognizable —A long-lost ice sheet could predict the future of New York City — one in which Lower Manhattan and Coney Island are 'perpetually submerged' Boyd noted there are a number of unknowns that would impact crop yield in the real world. Soil quality is a big variable, because lower quality soil would yield fewer crops. He also assumed a scenario where water systems were still flowing — "but you can imagine global catastrophe scenarios where there's additional obstacles and problems," he said. He also doesn't expect people will only eat peas for an entire year, but planting the most efficient crops minimizes the amount of land needed to feed a population. Boyd said this study could be used as a first step for cities looking to use resilient urban agriculture in land use policy. "Decisions that might seem optimal in one lens, maybe economically, may look a little bit less optimal if you were also including a lens like resilience, safety and well-being," he said.
