Extract from Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists
Statement
from the executive director
This
year marks the 70th anniversary of the Doomsday Clock, a graphic that
appeared on the first cover of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists
as it transitioned from a six-page, black-and-white newsletter to a
full-fledged magazine. For its first cover, the editors sought an
image that represented a seriousness of purpose and an urgent call
for action. The Clock, and the countdown to midnight that it implied,
fit the bill perfectly. The Doomsday Clock, as it came to be called,
has served as a globally recognized arbiter of
the planet’s health and safety ever since. Each year, the setting
of the Doomsday Clock galvanizes a global debate about whether the
planet is safer or more dangerous today than it was last year, and at
key moments in recent history. Our founders would not be surprised to
learn that the threats to the planet that the Science and Security
Board now considers have expanded since 1947. In fact, the Bulletin’s
first editor, Eugene Rabinowitch, noted that one of the purposes of
the Bulletin was to respond and offer solutions to the “Pandora’s
box of modern science,” recognizing the speed at which technological
advancement was occurring, and the demanding questions it would
present. In 1947 there was one technology with the potential to
destroy the planet, and that was nuclear power. Today, rising
temperatures, resulting from the industrial-scale burning of fossil
fuels, will change life on Earth as we know it, potentially
destroying or displacing it from significant portions of the world,
unless action is taken today, and in the immediate future. Future
technological innovation in biology, artificial intelligence, and the
cyber realm may pose similar global challenges. The knotty problems
that innovations
in these fields may present are not yet fully realized, but the
Bulletin’s
Science and Security Board tends to them with a watchful eye.
This
year’s Clock deliberations felt more urgent than usual. On the big
topics that concern the board, world leaders made too little progress
in the face of continuing turbulence. In addition to the existential
threats posed by nuclear weapons and climate change, new global
realities emerged, as trusted sources of information came under attack,
fake news was on the rise, and words were used in cavalier and often
reckless ways. As if to prove that words matter and fake news is
dangerous, Pakistan’s foreign minister issued a blustery statement,
a tweet actually, flexing Pakistan’s nuclear muscle—in response
to a fabricated “news” story about Israel. Today’s complex
global environment is in need of deliberate and considered policy
responses. It is ever more important that senior leaders across the
globe calm rather than stoke tensions that could lead
to war, either by accident or miscalculation. I once again commend
the board for approaching its task with the seriousness it deserves.
Bulletin Editor-in-Chief John Mecklin did a remarkable job pulling
together this document and reflecting the in-depth views and opinions
of the board. Considerable thanks goes to our supporters including
the Carnegie Corporation of New York, MacArthur Foundation,
Ploughshares Fund, David Weinberg and Jerry Newton, as well as valued
supporters across the year.
I
hope the debate engendered by the 2017 setting of the Clock raises
the level of conversation, promotes calls to action, and helps
citizens around the world hold their leaders responsible for
delivering a safer and healthier planet.
Rachel
Bronson, PhD
Executive
Director and Publisher
26
January, 2017
Chicago,
IL
No comments:
Post a Comment