L'horloge de l'apocalypse aujourd'hui

Every January, a small group of scientists, Nobel laureates, and security experts gather to make a simple yet powerful statement: How close is humanity to a global catastrophe?

Then they adjust the Doomsday Clock, a symbolic timepiece that counts down to “midnight,” representing humanity’s potential self-destruction.

This year, for 2026, the clock ticked closer to midnight than ever before, signaling a moment that demands our urgent attention.

In this article, we’ll explore not just the number on the clock, but why it matters, what threats pushed it forward, and what this metaphor means for all of us — especially at a time when global risks feel both distant and deeply personal.

What Is the Doomsday Clock?

First, let’s ground ourselves in what the Doomsday Clock actually is. Unlike a real clock, it doesn’t tell time; instead, it’s a symbol. The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists — a nonprofit group founded in 1945 by scientists including Albert Einstein and researchers from the Manhattan Project — created it in 1947. Its purpose has always been to visualize how close we are to destroying the world through human-made threats like nuclear war or environmental collapse.

Every year, the Bulletin’s Science and Security Board consults experts in nuclear risk, climate science, disruptive technologies, and international relations. Then they determine the clock’s setting, expressed in seconds to midnight. In other words, the smaller the number, the closer humanity is to potential catastrophe.

The 2026 Setting: 85 Seconds to Midnight

Dans January 2026, the Bulletin set the Doomsday Clock at 85 seconds to midnight — the closest it has ever been since the clock’s creation nearly 80 years ago. This time is four seconds closer than it was in 2025, and it marks a worrying trend.

This number isn’t chosen at random. It reflects scientists’ assessment that key risks are intensifying rather than receding. In other words, humanity isn’t moving away from danger — it’s edging toward it.

In the Bulletin’s own words: “Because of this failure of leadership, the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists Science and Security Board … sets the Doomsday Clock at 85 seconds to midnight, the closest it has ever been.”

Why the Clock Moved in 2026

To understand what this means, we must look at the major global threats that influenced the decision:

1. Rising Nuclear Tensions

First and foremost, nuclear weapons remain one of the most pressing dangers. Although nuclear war has felt like a distant Cold War relic to many, it is very much a present concern.

Tensions involving nuclear-armed countries have not eased. Conflicts in Ukraine continue to complicate relations between global powers, while other flashpoints — like the India-Pakistan border and instability in the Middle East — raise fears of escalation. In some cases, talks to limit nuclear arsenals have stalled or broken down.

Given this backdrop, scientists fear that geopolitical brinkmanship and fractured diplomacy could open the door to miscalculation — and nuclear catastrophe. It’s a sobering thought that the world’s most destructive weapons still shape our future.

2. Climate Change: The Slow-Burn Threat

Second, climate change — though not as immediate as a missile launch — represents an inexorable risk to human civilization. Extreme weather events, rising sea levels, and record temperatures demonstrate that earth’s climate systems are destabilizing. Even when nations agree on targets like those in the Paris Agreement, implementation often falls short.

Scientists consider climate change a “slow disaster” because, unlike a sudden explosion, its impacts accumulate over time. Still, those impacts can be equally catastrophic: food insecurity, displacement, and ecosystem collapse. Thus, climate dynamics naturally factor into the clock’s setting.

3. Disruptive Technologies and AI Risks

Third, we now live in an era where artificial intelligence and other advanced technologies amplify our risks — not just simply improve our lives. While innovation drives progress, it also creates vulnerabilities.

Unregulated AI can spread misinformation, obscure truth, and automate lethal systems.

Scientists worry that AI could exacerbate tensions, mislead publics, and be used in unforeseen ways that destabilize societies.

When combined with geopolitical strife or biological threats (like engineered pathogens), this technological complexity becomes harder to govern. That, in turn, pulls the metaphorical clock hand closer to midnight.

4. Biological Threats and Global Health Risks

Though overshadowed by nuclear anxiety and climate fears, biological risks also influence the clock’s setting. The Bulletin’s board has expressed concern over research into dangerous pathogens, weakened public health systems, and the potential misuse of life sciences.

We now know that pandemics can disrupt global stability. When new biological technologies fall into the wrong hands — or operate without robust ethical guardrails — the potential for harm increases. These risks make the clock’s warning more urgent.

What “85 Seconds to Midnight” Actually Means

So what does it really mean when scientists label the world 85 seconds from midnight? Is the apocalypse imminent in a literal sense?

No — it’s symbolic

The clock isn’t predicting the end of the world on a specific date. Instead, it is a warning signal — a metaphor pointing to trends that could, without corrective action, lead to widespread calamity.

Still, this metaphor is powerful. In everyday terms:

• It means we are closer to human-made catastrophe than at any time in history.
• It highlights how political, environmental, scientific, and technological challenges interact to raise overall risk.
• It underscores the idea that leadership and cooperation matter profoundly.

In effect, the clock acts like a status report for humanity — not inevitable doom, but a snapshot of where we are and where we could be headed.

Criticism and Misunderstandings

It’s important to acknowledge that not everyone interprets the clock in the same way. Some critics argue that its numeric precision implies more objectivity than the metaphor can justify, since the setting relies on expert opinion rather than mathematical certainty.

Moreover, many positive global trends — like reductions in extreme poverty, rising life expectancy, and scientific breakthroughs — are often left out of the clock’s narrative. Yet these are real and meaningful advances. Critics remind us that human progress and resilience still exist, even amid danger.

Still, for many scientists, the clock isn’t meant to frighten without reason. Instead, it is intended as a call to action — to remind leaders and citizens alike that our choices matter. In other words, the clock moves not because destiny is fixed, but because our collective behavior shapes our future.

What Comes Next: Turning Back the Clock

Here’s where the story becomes hopeful: the clock can move backward. It has done so several times in the past, most significantly in 1991, when the Cold War was winding down and nuclear arms reductions took place.

To push the hands farther from midnight in future years, experts suggest:

• Reviving diplomatic engagement between nuclear powers
• Strengthening international climate agreements
• Regulating risky technologies like AI and synthetic biology
• Supporting transparent, science-based public policy
• Building public awareness and advocacy

When the voices of citizens, scientists, and leaders converge behind solutions, the metaphorical danger fades.