Yet theres a deeper problem. Not only is the Doomsday Clock unscientific; the factors of its setting are now dominated more by policy questions than scientific ones. The former may be important, but claiming the authority of atomic scientists is appropriate only for the latter.
1 posted on
01/25/2020 9:57:03 AM PST by
McGruff
To: McGruff
doomsday clock.
Used to be the minutes until my ex girlfriend got home.
2 posted on
01/25/2020 9:59:07 AM PST by
dp0622
(Radicals, racists Don't point fingers at me I'm a small town white boy Just tryin' to make ends meet)
To: McGruff
Dang it! now i gotta sell my pearls?
4 posted on
01/25/2020 10:09:34 AM PST by
Bob434
To: McGruff
Same science as climate change.
5 posted on
01/25/2020 10:12:28 AM PST by
E. Pluribus Unum
(Democrats only believe in democracy when they win the election.)
To: McGruff
Time to create a "dumbass clock" for the left. The clock is never wrong, but it ain't just right.
6 posted on
01/25/2020 10:17:03 AM PST by
Bommer
(2020 - Vote all incumbent congressmen and senators out! VOTE THE BUMS OUT!!!)
To: McGruff
The Doomsday Clock is ridiculous. It has never been further than 17 minutes to midnight, yet it came into existence 38 million minutes ago.
7 posted on
01/25/2020 10:21:29 AM PST by
Fiji Hill
To: McGruff
In Mr. Pinkers view, the annual announcement is a publicity stunt that demeans the scientific community and makes the world seem more dangerous than it actually is. Mr. Pinker is correct. I don't know if "successful" properly describes a PR stunt where (1) the clock isn't a clock, (2) the minutes aren't minutes, and (3) the "atomic scientists" are political activists who couldn't tell you the difference between beta decay and a dead cat. And (4) that everybody knows it and has for decades. The word that describes a clock that shows five minutes to twelve for fifty years is "broken".
To: author
10 posted on
01/25/2020 10:25:47 AM PST by
McGruff
To: McGruff
A clock is always moving. Like time. It doesn’t stand still.
The doomsday “clock” is not a clock. It is a countdown timer that is NEVER STARTED.
But the name “doomsday clock” precludes critical thinking, and winds up convincing people that it is something to pay attention to.
It’s a political statement. They only advance their “clock” when a Republican is in office. Bammy brought us closer to death by jihad, and the f*****g “clock” didn’t move!
11 posted on
01/25/2020 10:30:38 AM PST by
I want the USA back
(We have sunk to a depth where restatement of the obvious is the first duty of intelligent men:Orwell)
To: McGruff
I look at the clock as another "we're all gonna die" anxiety enhancer in an election year.
Used to be the "homeless" showed up every time a republican stood for re-election, only to fade into the background after the election.
That became too obvious, so the dems are reaching back into the Goldwater era - War-mongering Trump is going to blow up the world unless we stop him! It dovetails nicely with the RUSSIA-RUSSIA-RUSSIA theme they ginned up for impeachment.
Can't run on the economy or international trade, and impeachment was a bust. Transgender, abortion, illegal immigration, gun control - the public seems ambivalent or openly opposed to these issues. Nobody believes the lying Dems any more, so trot out the "Concerned Scientists"...
12 posted on
01/25/2020 10:30:52 AM PST by
ZOOKER
(Until further notice the /s is implied...)
To: McGruff
The clock is a publicity stuntand a successful one.
Agree on the first point, disagree on the second. I have been hearing news items about the Doomsday Clock since the Reagan era - apparently it's a requirement that this clock move very close to midnight whenever a Republican takes office. No one cares about this nonsense, no one thinks about longer than the few seconds one sees or hears about it. There are more successful ad campaigns running on late night independent TV stations in Wyoming.
To: McGruff
When that damn thing does go off, I’m just gonna hit the snooze button.
20 posted on
01/25/2020 11:00:11 AM PST by
Texas Eagle
(If it wasn't for double-standards, Liberals would have no standards at all -- Texas Eagle)
To: McGruff
Who is making money off the Clock?
21 posted on
01/25/2020 11:07:05 AM PST by
Paladin2
To: McGruff
Psychologist Steven Pinker arguesand the bulletin admitsthat the clock is anything but a scientific instrument.
And what precisely is the counterargument?
To: McGruff
It moved forward in 1953, after the U.S. and the Soviet Union developed the hydrogen bomb, or in 1974, when missiles with multiple warheads became a reality.
Uhm. No it didn't.
People "moved" it.
Also this lame excuse for a Phd doesn't even know the difference between "and" and "or".
To: McGruff
I think the folks who run the nuclear clock, set the clock forward early.
They sprang forward about an hour.
25 posted on
01/25/2020 11:34:24 AM PST by
DoughtyOne
(It's a New Year, and time to up our FR Monthlies by 5-10%. You'll <hardly miss it and it will help.)
To: McGruff
the annual announcement is a publicity stunt that demeans the scientific community As a statistician who once worked extensively with the scientific community, I think this clock is not what should be worrying scientists. Their own conduct, politicizing research, is what demeans the community.
27 posted on
01/25/2020 12:13:20 PM PST by
Pollster1
("Governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed")
To: McGruff
Anyone who takes this seriously is a moron.
28 posted on
01/25/2020 1:34:07 PM PST by
rbg81
(Truth is stranger than fiction)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson