Introduction
With escalating conflicts in Iran and Ukraine, rapid advances in AI, and worsening climate change, the threat of nuclear war looms larger than ever. The Doomsday Clock, a symbolic representation of humanity’s proximity to global catastrophe, now stands closer to midnight than at any previous time. But who determines how close we are to disaster, and can we extend the time before midnight?
The planet is warming, conflicts intensify in the Middle East and Ukraine, increasing nuclear war risks. AI permeates daily life despite its unpredictability and hallucination tendencies. Scientists experimenting in laboratories risk unleashing threats potentially deadlier than Covid. The Doomsday Clock—a large, numberless quarter clock—counts down to apocalypse. In January, it was set at 85 seconds to midnight, the closest ever. Experts assert humanity has never been so near the brink.
“What we have seen is a slow almost sleepwalk into increasing dangers over the last decade. And we see these problems growing. We see science advancing at a rate that defies our ability to understand it, much less control it,”
said Alexandra Bell, CEO of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, the organisation responsible for setting the Doomsday Clock.
She described a “complete failure in leadership” in the US and other nations, which have done little to address interconnected global catastrophic threats. For example, climate change exacerbates global conflicts, and integrating AI into nuclear decision-making is deeply concerning.
Bell spoke via video call from her Washington DC office, adorned with a large world map, Day of the Dead cushions, and a framed print of Barbie superimposed on a mushroom cloud—a gift from a colleague reflecting the surreal nature of her work, where humor is essential.
Having devoted much of her career to nuclear arms control, Bell believes the public’s lack of experience with nuclear weapon use has fostered a false sense of security. She emphasized the role of luck in avoiding nuclear catastrophe.
“We’ve been lucky, because the odds are not in our favour. The more weapons that exist, for longer, the more likely it is something will go wrong,”she said, while acknowledging that diplomatic disarmament and peace efforts have also contributed to safety.
The Doomsday Clock was created in 1947 by Manhattan Project nuclear scientists aiming to alert the public and policymakers to the dangers of nuclear weapons. The clock’s time is typically set annually but can be adjusted more frequently if circumstances warrant. The setting is determined by the Bulletin’s science and security board, comprising leading scientists, academics, and diplomats who reach consensus each year.
The clock serves as a symbol, distilling complex existential threat discussions into a measurable, comprehensible form. It acts as a wake-up call to prompt action to prevent humanity’s self-destruction and has become a cultural icon. The Bulletin’s website offers a playlist of songs inspired by the clock, including works by The Clash, Pink Floyd, The Who, Bright Eyes, Linkin Park, Hozier, and Bastille.
But can the Doomsday Clock help humanity gain more time? What lessons do its setters offer about understanding and responding to global catastrophe risks?
1947: The First Clock Set at Seven Minutes to Midnight
Following the US bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945, many nuclear scientists felt profound guilt over their role in creating the world’s deadliest weapons. In 1945, 200 scientists linked to the University of Chicago’s Met Lab, which studied uranium’s structure, formed the Atomic Scientists of Chicago to inform the public about nuclear energy risks. Their first bulletin, published in December 1945, urged Americans to “work unceasingly for the establishment of international control of atomic weapons” and warned that all gains in wealth or health would be meaningless if the nation lived under the constant threat of sudden annihilation.
As the group expanded to include other Manhattan Project scientists, it dropped “Chicago” from its name and transformed the bulletin into a magazine. Early contributors included J. Robert Oppenheimer and Albert Einstein. The scientists recognized that nuclear energy gave humanity the power to destroy itself and predicted that advancing science would reveal new, potentially apocalyptic technologies. They stressed the importance of public awareness of emerging risks.
The clock itself was an accidental creation by Martyl Langsdorf, an artist and wife of a Manhattan Project physicist, who in 1947 was commissioned to design a new magazine cover. She chose a clock to symbolize urgency and set it at seven minutes to midnight because it looked visually balanced.
For three decades, Eugene Rabinowitch, a former Met Lab biophysicist and Bulletin editor, set the clock’s time. A 1960s Time magazine profile described him as a short man with a “jaunty blue beret” and an “ineffaceably cheerful smile” who seemed unlike a prophet of doom. Nonetheless, Rabinowitch was haunted by his role in developing the bomb and once considered leaking news of an impending nuclear attack on Japan. In 1971, such a warning would have been justified.
1949: The Clock Moves to Three Minutes to Midnight
In 1949, the Soviet Union conducted its first nuclear test, initiating the nuclear arms race. Rabinowitch moved the clock’s hands for the first time, from seven to three minutes to midnight. He clarified in an editorial that the intention was not to create hysteria but to alert Americans to the grave dangers and the need for serious decisions.
Over subsequent years, Rabinowitch adjusted the clock sporadically in response to events. In 1953, he moved it to two minutes to midnight after the hydrogen bomb’s development, then back to seven minutes in 1960 reflecting increased Cold War cooperation. The 1962 Cuban missile crisis, the closest humanity came to nuclear annihilation, occurred between Bulletin issues and did not prompt an immediate clock change. Instead, in 1963, Rabinowitch moved the clock back to 12 minutes to midnight following the Partial Test Ban Treaty. He adjusted the clock several more times, but by 1972 it was again at 12 minutes after US and USSR commitments to reduce ballistic missiles. Rabinowitch died in 1973, after which the clock was set by committee.
1991: The Cold War Ends; Clock at 17 Minutes to Midnight
The farthest the clock has ever been from midnight was at the Cold War’s end. The Bulletin’s board set it at 17 minutes to midnight, declaring that “the world has entered a new era.” Humanity had made greater progress in reducing nuclear war risk than the founders anticipated; initially, the clock’s design did not allow the hand to move beyond 15 minutes.
During the 1990s and early 2000s, the Bulletin faced financial difficulties as the anxieties of its founders appeared to belong to a past era. However, global tensions and threats soon resurged, and the clock continued to tick.
2007: A Modern Doomsday Clock at Five Minutes to Midnight
In 2005, Kennette Benedict became the Bulletin’s executive director, tasked with revitalizing the struggling magazine. An academic with experience at the MacArthur Foundation, Benedict knew many of the Bulletin’s founders and had attended artist Martyl Langsdorf’s legendary cocktail parties.
Before Benedict’s tenure, the Doomsday Clock was updated quietly. Recognizing its potential as a powerful communication tool, she held a major press conference in 2007 to announce moving the clock from seven to five minutes to midnight, citing North Korea’s nuclear tests, Iran’s atomic ambitions, and climate change threats. She enlisted prominent scientists, including Stephen Hawking and Martin Rees, to participate.
“It made a huge splash,”she recalled.
“People were hungry for this. They wanted to know.”
Benedict established the clock-setting and press conference as annual events and hired designer Michael Bierut to update the clock’s design, which became the Bulletin’s logo. She also broadened the clock’s scope to include other human-made threats like climate change and disruptive technologies, beyond nuclear risks. Some critics accused her of diluting the message, and debates among clock-setters became more complex and heated. Benedict recounted a scientist arguing that climate change’s irreversible consequences were so severe that midnight had already passed.
“All science and technology can be used for good or ill. They’re dual use. Starting with fire: it can heat our homes and burn down our houses,”Benedict explained during a meeting in her Chicago apartment.
The Bulletin’s founders recognized this duality. Rabinowitch referred to the “Pandora’s box of modern science.” The modern Doomsday Clock aims to encourage safeguards against dangers accompanying scientific progress. Awareness is the first step to action, and true awareness involves both knowledge and emotional engagement.
From Benedict’s apartment, on a clear day, one can see the University of Chicago, where she now teaches nuclear policy. She begins her courses by assigning John Hersey’s Hiroshima, which recounts the bombing through survivors’ stories. She tells students:
“My basic philosophy is that the truth shall set you free. And I’m going to impart as much as I can. But first, it’s going to make you miserable.”
Despite the grim subject, Benedict remains optimistic, noting humanity has previously pulled back from the brink.
“The history of nuclear weapons, at least since the end of the cold war, is actually pretty hopeful: we used to have 70,000 nuclear weapons and now we have 10,000 or 12,000. That’s proof of concept, right?”
2020: The Clock Counts in Seconds at 100 Seconds to Midnight
Six years ago, the Doomsday Clock moved from two minutes to 100 seconds to midnight. The Bulletin cited insufficient arms control, climate inaction, misinformation, and AI threats. Rachel Bronson, Benedict’s successor, likened the time to the two-minute warning in American football, a period of high danger and low margin for error. The clock has remained this close to midnight, now measured in seconds.
Bronson reflected on her role:
“The question often is: how do you go to work every day?”She did not despair, noting the dedication of experts and innovative efforts underway. She observed that scientists often fear dangers outside their expertise more, as the unknown is scarier.
During research for this article, it became clear how easy it is to disengage from apocalyptic discussions due to their frightening nature. However, experts studying doomsday futures find courage in confronting facts and envisioning solutions. This counters the tendency to ignore existential risks.
Bronson expressed limits to her optimism, criticizing politicians for failing to act decisively or heed expert advice:
“I’m so bullish on the science, but I’m so pessimistic on the politics,”she said.
2026: Approaching Doomsday at 85 Seconds to Midnight
In January, the clock was set to 85 seconds to midnight, the closest ever. Shortly after, AI expert Gary Marcus argued on the Bulletin’s website that humanity was already “significantly closer to the brink” after revelations of former President Trump’s push for unrestricted military AI access. A recent study found that in simulated war games, leading AIs from OpenAI, Anthropic, and Google chose to use nuclear weapons 95% of the time.
Two days later, the US and Israel began bombing Iran, increasing nuclear war risks.
“Further escalation or expansion of the conflict could lead to actions driven by miscalculation, misperception or madness, as President Kennedy once said,”warned Alexandra Bell, who became Bulletin president in 2025. She expressed concern about the lack of a plan to secure Iran’s nuclear materials and feared other countries might conclude nuclear weapons are necessary for security.
Bell’s motivation traces back to childhood in North Carolina, when she wrote to President George H. W. Bush about the Exxon Valdez oil spill, criticizing his inadequate response. The White House replied dismissively, fueling her determination. She believes many underestimate their agency in addressing geopolitical problems like climate change and nuclear war.
“I can assure you, elected leaders care about what their constituents call them about. So, the idea that people don’t have agency is not true,”Bell said. She acknowledged voters’ other concerns but emphasized:
“The message we’re trying to get out is you’re going to have to care about these bigger issues, too. Because if we get them wrong – particularly if we get the nuclear problem wrong – nothing else matters.”
The Future: Learning to Think in Atomic Time
On a rainy evening in Chicago, I met Daniel Holz, University of Chicago astrophysicist and chair of the Bulletin’s science and security board. The board meets at least twice yearly and communicates regularly. Holz’s role is to help experts reach consensus on the clock’s setting. He feels the urgency intensifies annually, and the work can be all-consuming. He once planned a family trip to Japan but included official meetings in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
Among academics and futurists, it has become common to discuss one’s p(doom) value—the probability assigned to global catastrophe. Most people struggle with probabilistic thinking, and the clock offers a simpler, symbolic expression of humanity’s dangers. Because it is symbolic rather than scientific, Holz considers the psychology of how the time will be interpreted.
“If people feel powerless and so petrified that they can’t engage, then we’re making things worse. That’s something I think about a lot,”he said.
The clock’s value lies partly in helping people confront their deepest fears and expand their imagination. Tracking the clock’s hands can motivate action even if contemplating the world’s end is difficult. The Bulletin’s board discusses horrific scenarios—nuclear winter, lab leaks killing all biological life—that most people need help accepting as possible. Holz’s work studying black holes has given him perspective on existential risk.
“Cosmology is very good at giving perspective. When you study this stuff, you definitely get a strong sense of how insignificant we are here on Earth, which sounds bad but is actually very empowering. The timescales, the length scales, are so vast, and here we are, this super tiny, little irrelevant speck. You quickly realise the universe is not going to save us … If we blow ourselves up, no one will notice or care,”he said.
“Which means it’s up to us, right?”
A nuclear winter is among the worst disasters imaginable, yet from a cosmic viewpoint, it is negligible. Holz recounted teaching a class where a student asked if a nuclear war would be noticeable elsewhere in the galaxy.
“It actually would be really hard to notice. You’d have to be really close,”he said.
While I have not mastered this cosmological perspective, I met Dieter Gruen, a scientist who helped shift my view. Gruen, in his early 20s, worked on the Manhattan Project in Oak Ridge, Tennessee, and later advocated for nuclear conflict prevention. Now 103 years old and still active in solar panel research, Gruen offers a unique perspective on today’s political challenges. It was a week after the US declared war on Iran. Gruen kept copies of the New York Times, The New Yorker, and the Bulletin magazine beside his leather armchair. He was somber after reading reports of Iran enriching enough uranium for about 10 nuclear bombs. When asked if he agreed that the world is in greater peril than ever, he replied gravely,
“I feel like I’ve never felt before.”Asked about the Cuban missile crisis, he acknowledged it was severe but said,
“Somehow this feels worse.”
He then asked if I was worried. I admitted that while irrational, the thought of nuclear apocalypse is so terrifying that my mind avoids dwelling on it. Gruen looked puzzled and said,
“Yes. That’s not rational.”
