Jump to content

Talk:Doomsday Clock

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 66.150.46.254 (talk) at 13:37, 12 January 2010 (→‎Total Disarmament). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Fear mongering/propaganda?

No mention of any of these in the entire article? 83.71.86.199 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 17:53, 26 November 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Reagan

The clock was changed because of "U.S. policies of Ronald Reagan"? (#11) What were these policies? What impact did they have on world politics? No other politician has been referenced in this way. This just seems like a slam on Reagan with no actual information. -- Steve carlson 04:34, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Project SDI, "Empire of Evil", "I've signed legislation that will outlaw Russia forever. We begin bombing in five minutes", Arm races and more --Winterheart 23:49, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I was under the impression that a race requires at least two participants... hmm. And you're quoting a mic test? The arms race was as much the responsibility of Soviet leadership as it was the U.S.'s. Blaming Reagan is childish. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.169.70.10 (talk) 19:03, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, they really screwed that up. It turns out, forcing the USSR to collapse was good for the world - who knew?! Oh, and SDI would lead to nuclear war? Why would someone be suicidal enough to launch missles into a shield, provoking a war that would be horribly one-sided?
OK, I agree that Reagan did all those things, I just think the article should be more specific rather than condemning Reagan's entire administration.Steve carlson 00:03, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wait, is this clock thing just a lefty farce? I feel so used. 74.225.130.13 21:32, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

India/Pakistan

Wasn't it also changed when India and Pakistan tested their weapons in the late 90s?—iFaqeer (Talk to me!) 10:06, Nov 28, 2004 (UTC)

Yes, I added all of the changes. I'm making a little graphic of them too... --Fastfission 20:29, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Physical clock face?

OK, here's what I wanna know: is there an actual physical clock face that they move the hands back and forth on, or is it just an abstract concept? Lee M 02:33, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Looks like they have a large "clock" they use for making their press releases ([1]) , but generally I think it is just a graphic symbol that they use on their cover. --Fastfission 02:51, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)

There is an actual clock, but it has no numbers, just dash marks.

There is no actual clock, just images of them they put on their press releases. Man The Wise 23:42, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Removed text

I've removed the text added by an anonymous user:

The Doomsday Clock was the US concept codename of a statically installed, 50000 megaton, cobalt salted, three-phase nuclear explosive device capable of destroying all mankind merely by the tremendous radioactive fallout it produces. The device was never built or actually designed.

I've never seen this term being used for something like this before, would like a citation or a link to something reputable. I'm suspicious of anything official, even as a concept, proposed in the 50 Gigaton range. --Fastfission 01:41, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)

This rumor was spread around in various forms after "Beneath the Planet of the Apes". Could it exist? Yes. Any evidence that it is real? no. Granted, the rumor was out before the movie showed, but not before filming started. 66.150.46.254 (talk) 13:29, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cuban Missile Crisis

What about the Cuban Missile Crisis? Did this event not contribute to the "minutes to midnight?" --pyro05x 16:44, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, no--the clock is only updated with the publication of a new issue of the bulletin; since the Cuban Missile Crisis came and went in 13 days, they didn't have time to update it. I think the clock is more meant to sum up each year, or at least quarter. --Dvyost 16:47, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I think it's foolish that they couldn't go back and say "during those thirteen days, we were at one minute to midnight." I've never understood why they couldn't add that to the history of the clock. I know the clock is essentially useless, but it's odd that the closest we came to annihilation never registered on the clock specifically created to track our closeness to nuclear war. GreatGatsby 22:00, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The clock is adjusted based on analysis of worldwide trends and not mere individual events. This accounts for the lack of a clock movement in response to the CMC. IONChicago, 02 August 2006
But ironically it was "mere" individual events that put us the closest to actual nuclear war... --Fastfission 18:31, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
LOL agreeded. strange clock this one... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Oszalał (talk • contribs) 06:59, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Terrorists

The sentance "terrorists seek to aquire nuclear arms", I don't think this really belongs. I know that they might be, but do we really know. This is an encyclopedia, not a message board for speculation. I think that sentence should be removed or maybe re-worded. If no one posts anything in here in the next couple of days, I'll change it. anon 08:45, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

The "terrorists seek to acquire nuclear arms" comes directly from the Bulletin's explanation for changing the time, so I think it's more than appropriate to include it on the page. Jlgospelfan 09:16, 7 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It should be mentioned that it is really impossible to determine how close the world is to nuclear war, and that one should not use this clock to gauge the possibility of a nuclear conflict.

Veracity

The page should mention that it is really impossible to tell how close the world is to nuclear war, and therefore one should not use this clock to gauge the possibility of a nuclear conflict. The clock is a subjective interpretation of world events and cannot predict the future.

That is a very good point. The fact is that this is theoretically a collective opinion and truly does not speak to the actual concrete "proof" of the prospect of some type of man made ELE. As a heavy believer of science one must realize that much of these types of predictions are primarily theory, and should not be taken too seriously.

Wiki touts itself as some sort of neutral encyclopedia that weeds out POV. This whole article is basically POV or worse just plain propaganda posing as some sort of dispassionate scientific assessment of the risk of human annilation from nuclear war or whatever - "periodically corrected" as the introduction boasts. What a crock... Jmdeur (talk) 00:23, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Question about Doomsday Clock concept

Has anybody here read any info about the doomsday clock concept that supposedly was studied: a 50,000 megaton cobalt-encased warhead? Some people in internet mention and I was wondering if anyone had a link to it.

[[Robert Mendoza] 18:39, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

See my previous comment about "Beneath the Planet of the Apes". Hollywood excels at building great doomsday devices; why, planet of the apes itself... 66.150.46.254 (talk) 13:32, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What Standards are used

I think the article could use some info on who/how changes a re decided upon. ie, how do they decide to move it forward 2 minutes and not three?--Davidmintz 19:47, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

From what I can tell, it is totally arbitrary. I added a line to that affect in the article. --Fastfission 20:58, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Does the clock deal with just nuclear conflict or does it deal other of means of global destruction (Bioenginnered Plague, Icecap melting, failure of magnetosphere, and other disastorous occureneces)

The clock is adjusted by the Board of Directors of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, based on analysis of worldwide trends. While it is generally associated with nuclear disaster (which remains a top concern to the organization), The Bulletin's directors take into account multiple geopolitical and scientific issues when debating whether to move the clock. IONChicago, 02 August 2006

Problem: deltas have the wrong sign

The Doomsday Clock started out at 23:53 back in 1947.

1949 - […] Clock changed to three minutes to midnight (-4 change).

Advancing a clock from 23:53 to 23:57 is a change of +4 minutes, not −4. What's happening here is that arithmetic is applied to numbers blindly, losing the meaning of the numbers from sight. The graph exhibits the same mistake: the curve goes down as time advances. Such innumeracy, while sadly all too common, is not worthy of an encyclopedia.

The article is easy to fix and I may do so myself, but I have the nasty feeling that such a change might be reverted. Wikipedians may argue that the current version is correct (even if it isn't). What do you think?
—Herbee 12:39, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The orientation of all of it is set up so that it is counting 'down to midnight, which seemed to me to be the best way to convey the semantic meaning of the numbers (it is a change in minutes to midnight, not the raw time). I'm not sure that changing it so that it is counting up to midnight makes the meaning of the numbers more clear. If you want to take the time to turn everything around, feel free to, but be aware that it was not accidental. --Fastfission 14:43, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The Doomsday Clock is not a countdown. You're just making that up to justify a design flaw. The Doomsday Clock is a metaphor to make complicated issues easy to understand at a glance. We should accept the metaphor and interpret the numbers as what they are: clock times. We should not mix in another metaphor (of a countdown), or try to dumb the subject down by adding another layer of metaphor (whatever you're proposing).
—Herbee 19:34, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I've changed the text to use "closer to" and "farther from", and I've included a slightly longer description each time the clock hands change direction. See if you like this approach...
Atlant 15:42, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Good job Atlant; that certainly fixes the problem. Legibility hasn't improved though; maybe I'll try to fix that.
—Herbee 19:34, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Problem: graph misrepresents data

The graph shows the "Doomsday time" varying continuously from year to year. That is not what the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists intends. Each Bulletin moves the hands of the Doomsday Clock discontinuously, after which they stay fixed in the same position until the next Bulletin.
—Herbee 12:39, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it doesn't necessarily show it varying continuously (the lines just connect the datapoints, which are clearly marked), but anyway, feel free to re-draw it if you are concerned. --Fastfission 14:39, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Not necessarily, no: not if you ignore the lines that suggest continuity and mentally add the horizontal lines that should be there. Let's just say that there is room for improvement.
—Herbee 19:40, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Also, look at Image_talk:Doomsday_Clock_Graph.png. There's another, discontinuous version of it there, which you're welcome to put in. There's also some brief discussion between people who like it one way or another. I don't care either way, honestly. --Fastfission 14:46, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Update

Does anyone know the current time???Tere naam 01:28, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The article is up-to-date.
Atlant 01:47, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Inverted Graph

I would have expected upper levels on the graph to be closer to doom. It took me a minute to realize closer to the bottom is worse. So it might make sense to flip the y-axis by putting '0' at the top, maybe with a dashed 'doom' line. Jeffhoy 15:25, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Then again, if you think about the graph representing a bomb dropping, it's mnemonic ;-). Seriously, arguments could be presented either way and I think the red/blue scale on the left side makes this pretty clear. Another good part about have zero at the bottom is we aren't bounded towards the top. Someday, the world may again start getting safer and we may need ever-increasing times to midnight. Well, on second thought, nevermind that one. Maybe we just need an improved title for the graph?
Atlant 16:14, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
However red doesn't mean negative in parts of the world such as China Nil Einne 04:24, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Add The Clock to the Article

Someone should add a random picture of the infamous clock to the article. I think that is a must for this wiki article. Like this one here --Gakhandal 15:48, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What do the minutes stand for?

I'm assuming that the minutes don't mean anything. That the only thing they're measuring is the danger relative to the other minutes that have been assigned. Is this a fair assumption? I used to think that the setting on the clock corresponded to a belief that nuclear war was actually that close to being started. Since I came here looking for an explanation of exactly what the setting meant, I think others might be in search of that info, and it might be nice if someone added it to the article. -Freekee 00:38, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You understand things correctly; the "minutes" are arbitrary.
Atlant 00:52, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Clock change in 2007

I figured this was coming when I got the postcard saying they'd be delaying the January issue. :-( Thanks, George, for making our world a safer place (not).

Atlant 19:38, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I figured they were changing the clock as a way of bringing publicity to their new website. Just think of all that lovely advertising revenue... Am I being too cynical here? Tom. 155.198.95.44 16:26, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • ...Short answer - probably. The clock changes quite rarely, and their website gets plenty of traffic without changing the time. Crimsone 17:02, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • actually i've heard a lot of criticism of the bulletin for not moving the clock more agressively to highlight the current problems in stopping proliferation, especially post-9/11. they are probably now catching up with the current situation. Emax0 01:22, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What a joke

We're always on the brink of doomsday yet the human race still manages to survive. If they're going to call it a clock at least set a countdown or make some sort of time prediction for the end of humans. Setting and then resetting the position of the clock makes it not a clock. It's a lot more closer to the color coated terrorism alert in America. It's always set at high but nothing really ever happens. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.96.200.103 (talk • contribs).

Please remember that Wikipedia talk pages exist to discuss the article and not the topic of the article.
Atlant 01:03, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Also, don't post something that is the exact same as a highly Google indexed rant on the subject. People'll sue you for copyright infringement! 68.39.174.238 04:44, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

2012?

So what is the predicted year by the atomic scientists that we will annihilate ourselves with nukes? If each minute stands for one year from 2007, then the ending nuclear annihilation will appear in 2012! This is ironic because so many sources (including the Mayan super-calender) predicts this year as the end of the world or end of an era. Thoughts? Zachorious 08:56, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I could be mistaken, but I've always understood it to be a representation of how close we are to the brink, rather than an estimate as to when something will actually happen. --Ckatzchatspy 09:35, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You're not mistaken.
Atlant 13:59, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It is not meant to be any sort of predictive device. Minutes do not "stand" for anything concrete. --140.247.240.75 19:55, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Though the minutes are not supposed to represent years, it is chilling that we could be close to Judgement Day! AAAAAHHH!!! --Defender 911 23:56, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Would it really matter if it went to 12, I mean, we'd be dead anyway....--66.218.148.99 (talk) 12:29, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dooms day at 12

Imagine if it ever reaches twelve of all the people who will probally freak out. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Regono (talk • contribs) 00:29, 12 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Obviously, it will only reach 12 during a nuclear war. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by M2K 2 (talk • contribs) 02:42, 18 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

There is Extraneous Non Related Information Posted for the history of the time changes - See February 9 ---- —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 199.46.199.233 (talk) 22:38, 13 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Given that there are several creative works referencing the term "minutes to midnight", this page has seen an increasing number of disambiguation headers in recent days. In an effort to solve that problem, I have created a new disambiguation page at Minutes to Midnight (disambiguation). The list there includes the Heroes and Highlander episodes and the Linkin Park album previously listed at the top of this article, plus a few other references I located. Hopefully, this will help. --Ckatzchatspy 08:22, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Forgot it appears here too. Ronbo76 20:49, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Removed the redirection from Minutes to Midnight so as it goes to Linkin Park Album..Main reason for this are the Buzz about it and Google results on the subject..Ppapadeas 10:10, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Reversed - the album may be popular now, but may not be so in a few months time, whereas the clock has been around for decades. Minutes To Midnight already redirects there anyways. --Ckatzchatspy 16:58, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

totally right...Ppapadeas 19:52, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think Minutes to midnight should go to a midnight disambig page, where it would like to the LP album and doomsday clock, among other midnight things.

Criticism

Some constructive criticism should be added for this page. The "clock", IMHO, is kind of stupid and while Wiki needs it's neutral format, some of the logical silliness of the clock and its usefulness or lack thereof to society should be noted.

What does midnight represent?

I don't understand exactly what midnight is. Does it signify the beginning of a nuclear war, or does it represent when the last humans are killed by nukes? If it's the latter, then nuclear war would be like a minute to midnight. (Wikifan999 06:07, 29 March 2007 (UTC))[reply]

The first sentence explains what midnight is supposed to mean. Your own idiosyncratic interpretation is not really useful. --24.147.86.187 18:11, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ouch speaking of neutral POV haha. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.220.125.54 (talk) 01:58, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ambig redirect

This has been a bone of contention on this and other articles. If you list one, then all the others deserve or want to get added by other users. Recommend clearly up the ambig. Ronbo76 20:48, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nostradamus, Mayan calender, and the doomsday clock have a run-in here

Nostradumus predicted WWIII to be started by the execution of a man nammed Mabus or Madus, and as the 2012 guy said, one minute for each year will bring us to the mayan end date. And Madus spelled backward is Sudam, doesn't that sound like Saddam? However, only the doomsday clock and nostradumaus really go together, the clock will probably land on midnight in 2012, But nostradumus said, "The war will last seven years and twenty" so both the clock and nostradumus together cancel out the mayan theory. what do you think? and souldn't this all be on the page? (I'd put this on all three pages but that will look wierd) (24.60.147.196 01:47, 29 March 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Oh, my user name is (Darth Vader II 01:49, 29 March 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Some serious problem of proportion...

I would like to point out that there is only one sentence in this article about what the Doomsday Clock actually is and that takes up no more of the article than the Gummi Bears reference. --87.175.64.226 17:59, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A problem of proportion or a triumph of concision? What exactly would you have said more about what the clock "actually is"? It is a fairly simple concept. --24.147.86.187 14:16, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gummi Bears

What is this doing here? Is there any indication it's an actual reference and not merely something of the same name? I find it hard to believe that an afternoon Disney cartoon for kids set in the Middle Ages was referring to nuclear annihilation. --Belg4mit 04:59, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Total Disarmament

When they finally get rid of all nuclear weapons (Yes, I'm an optimist), what time will they set the clock to? 11:01? -DragonAtma

They'd probably get rid of the clock altogether. But who knows. It's not going to happen anytime soon. --24.147.86.187 23:34, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

They would get rid of the clock after World War Three kills every single person. Uber555 17:16, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sadly, nuclear weapons will never go away. They are too simple to build in concept; just get a certain amount of fissable material together and run. They are the proverbial "Genie out of the bottle" as I have heard said (although I prefer a "Pandora's Box" analogy).

Citation

I've added some content at the beginning, but I don't know how to cite a web page. If someone could put this in for me, that'd be great. http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2002/02/27/doomsday-clock.htm Agent_Koopa 13:47, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done. (I've actually used a reference from the "Bulletin" web site.) Thanks. --Ckatzchatspy 18:43, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Doomsday clock.svg

Image:Doomsday clock.svg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 06:26, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've added a rationale as this image is needed. Hopefully, it will address the issue. --Ckatzchatspy 09:04, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone else?...

Whenever I click the link to see the official website for the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists and the Doomsday Clock, it cannot seem to connect and gives me a "Problem Loading Page" error.

I'm wondering whether its just me or do others face the same problem?

If it's others, then we may need to fix the link perhaps? ArchiveMaker (talk) 00:58, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I tried all the official links I could find - no problems loading. It could be a firewall issue on your system, or (more likely, if it doesn't repeat) a glitch somewhere across the 'Net. Thanks for bringing it up, though - always helpful. --Ckatzchatspy 10:26, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Addition to page?

I was thinking of putting something in here about whether politicians reference the clock publicly when the time gets changed or reference it at all. I would like some comments on if this would be a good add or not and if anyone has a good reference to use for that? --Rbgolfer (talk) 05:36, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

stop it!

I'm getting tired of hearing that the clock is to be taken literal or in a sense of it, this clock is only symbolic it is only based on the current condition of free world security and should not be taken seriously. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.203.28.14 (talk) 02:06, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Addition or subtraction of time on the chart

currently, as the time approaches midnight, the chart shows the subtraction of the number of minutes in read. When the time drops, it is a plus sign in green. Shouldn't it be the other way around? As the clock approaches midnight, time is added so it should be a plus sign in red. and vice versa for time dropping. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.4.90.142 (talk) 05:33, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Russians

The doomsday clock can be heard at the beginning and end of the song : shouldn't it be added to the section "in Pop culture", sub-section "In music" ? Or is it considered an original interpretation ? Blinking Spirit (talk) 19:15, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]


References to the 2007 clock announcement ("Doomsday Clock" Moves Two Minutes Closer To Midnight) should point to this press release link: http://thebulletin.org/content/media-center/announcements/2007/01/17/doomsday-clock-moves-two-minutes-closer-to-midnight OR to the full page announcement (summary) "It is 5 minutes to midnight" at http://thebulletin.metapress.com/content/q9857x714r722857/?p=f0f38daf388648f9a2033d539f805603&pi=20 -- Thanks! Atomicgurl00 @ BAS (talk) 21:14, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DJ Shadow Update

Hello. I am new to wikipedia so I wanted to put this to the group before figuring how to update this item but whoever posted a comment regarding "the Clock" being referenced in a DJ Shadow song, I'm fairly sure they were thinking about the song "Six Days" (2002) RATHER than "Midnight in a Perfect World". "Six Days" samples an old 60's protest song (re:Six Day War) by a group called "Colonel Bagshot" and is commonly thought to reference/foreshadow nuclear war. BlatherSkyte (talk) 14:55, 27 May 2009 (UTC)BlatherSkyte[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Doomsday_Clock&oldid=337382162"