(The Epoch Times)—OpenAI, the company responsible for ChatGPT, recently announced the creation of a new team with a very specific task: to stop AI models from posing “catastrophic risks” to humanity.
Preparedness, the aptly titled team, will be overseen by Aleksander Madry, a machine-learning expert and Massachusetts Institute of Technology-affiliated researcher. Mr. Madry and his team will focus on various threats, most notably those of “chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear” variety. These might seem like far-fetched threats—but they really shouldn’t.
As the United Nations reported earlier this year, the risk of countries turning to nuclear weapons is at its highest point since the Cold War. This report was published before the horrific events that occurred in Israel on Oct. 7. A close ally of Vladimir Putin’s, Nikolai Patrushev, recently suggested that the “destructive” policies of “the United States and its allies were increasing the risk that nuclear, chemical or biological weapons would be used,” according to Reuters.
Merge AI with the above weapons, particularly nuclear weapons, cautions Zachary Kallenborn, a research affiliate with the Unconventional Weapons and Technology Division of the National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism (START), and you have a recipe for unmitigated disaster.
Mr. Kallenborn has sounded the alarm, repeatedly and unapologetically, on the unholy alliance between AI and nuclear weapons. Not one to mince words, the researcher warned, “If artificial intelligences controlled nuclear weapons, all of us could be dead.”
He isn’t exaggerating. Exactly 40 years ago, as Mr. Kallenborn, a policy fellow at the Schar School of Policy and Government, described, Stanislav Petrov, a Soviet Air Defense Forces lieutenant colonel, was busy monitoring his country’s nuclear warning systems. All of a sudden, according to Mr. Kallenborn, “the computer concluded with the highest confidence that the United States had launched a nuclear war.” Mr. Petrov, however, was skeptical, largely because he didn’t trust the current detection system. Moreover, the radar system lacked corroborative evidence.
Thankfully, Mr. Petrov concluded that the message was a false positive and opted against taking action. Spoiler alert: The computer was completely wrong, and the Russian was completely right.
“But,” noted Mr. Kallenborn, a national security consultant, “if Petrov had been a machine, programmed to respond automatically when confidence was sufficiently high, that error would have started a nuclear war.”
Furthermore, he suggested, there’s absolutely “no guarantee” that certain countries “won’t put AI in charge of nuclear launches,” because international law “doesn’t specify that there should always be a ‘Petrov’ guarding the button.”
“That’s something that should change, soon,” Mr. Kallenborn said.
He told me that AI is already reshaping the future of warfare.
Artificial intelligence, according to Mr. Kallenborn, “can help militaries quickly and more effectively process vast amounts of data generated by the battlefield; make the defense industrial base more effective and efficient at producing weapons at scale, and may be able to improve weapons targeting and decision-making.”
Take China, arguably the biggest threat to the United States, for example, and its AI-powered military applications. According to a report out of Georgetown University, in the not-so-distant future, Beijing may use AI not just to assist during wartime but to actually oversee all acts of warfare.
This should concern all readers.
“If the launch of nuclear weapons is delegated to an autonomous system,” Mr. Kallenborn fears that they “could be launched in error, leading to an accidental nuclear war.”
“Adding AI into nuclear command and control,” he said, “may also lead to misleading or bad information.”
He’s right. AI depends on data, and sometimes data are wildly inaccurate.
Although there isn’t one particular country that keeps Mr. Kallenborn awake at night, he’s worried by “the possibility of Russian President Vladimir Putin using small nuclear weapons in the Ukraine conflict.” Even limited nuclear usage “would be quite bad over the long-term” because “the nuclear taboo” would be removed, thus “encouraging other states to be more cavalier with nuclear weapons usage.”
“Nuclear weapons,” according to Mr. Kallenborn, are the “biggest threat to humanity.”
“They are the only weapon in existence that can cause enough harm to truly cause human extinction,” he said.
As mentioned earlier, throwing AI into the nuclear mix appears to increase the risk of mass extinction. The warnings of Mr. Kallenborn, a well-respected researcher who has dedicated years of his life to researching the evolution of nuclear warfare, carry a great deal of credibility.
Two Storms, One Harvest
Every food crisis in living memory has been a one-shock event. The 2008 price spike was a commodity bubble. The 2020 shortages were a logistics failure. The 2022 grain scare was a war on one exporter’s ports. Each time, the system bent, adjusted, and recovered, and each time the experts assured us afterward that global markets are simply too big and too diversified to fail.
What nobody in Washington seems eager to discuss is that 2026 is shaping up to be something the modern food system has never actually faced. Two independent shocks, one climatic and one geopolitical, are converging on the same harvest cycle at the same time. Not sequentially. Simultaneously.
Start with the weather. The Pacific Ocean is currently building toward what forecasters now openly call a record event. NOAA’s Climate Prediction Center puts the odds of at least a strong El Niño near 88 percent, with roughly two in three odds it reaches “very strong” status, the tier reserved for perhaps three or four events in the entire satellite era. Every major global model now projects a median peak in Super El Niño territory, and most of them project it exceeding the 2015-16 event, which until now held the modern record. Sea surface anomalies were already brushing the super threshold in mid-July, months before these events normally peak. The atmosphere has already shifted into El Niño mode, and the event is forecast to crest in late fall and early winter.
This is not about “climate change.” It’s about the standard cycles of weather, and the cycle we’re currently in is one that has likely devastated societies in the past. We’re better prepared as a society today, but not all Americans are equally prepared.
Serious households have started doing the quiet math on their own. Grocery bills tell part of the story, and the forecast maps tell the rest, which is why long-term food storage has moved from fringe hobby to mainstream line item in the family budget, with established suppliers like Heaven’s Harvest seeing demand from people who five years ago would have rolled their eyes at the idea. That instinct is not paranoia. It is pattern recognition, and the pattern is worth walking through carefully.
Editor’s Note: Heaven’s Harvest IS a sponsor, but the warnings of this article are real and would be written even if we didn’t have a survival food sponsor. With that said, those who take advantage of what they offer can use promo code “Patriot” for 15% off.
The Fertilizer Clock Is Already Running
While the Pacific warms, the second shock has been unfolding in the Strait of Hormuz. The conflict with Iran turned the world’s most important energy chokepoint into a contested waterway, and the consequences reach far beyond the gas pump. Roughly a third of global fertilizer trade moves through Hormuz, and the disruption sent urea prices up 86 percent year over year by March, with a 53 percent jump in a single month.
The World Bank projects energy prices rising about 24 percent in 2026 and fertilizer about 31 percent. By its own accounting, fertilizer prices ran 35 percent higher in the first five months of this year than the same period last year.
Here is the mechanism the nightly news will not explain. Fertilizer is not a grocery item. It is a time-delayed input. The nitrogen a farmer in Iowa or Punjab could not afford to apply this spring does not show up as a problem this spring. It shows up as a thinner harvest six to twelve months later.
The World Bank’s own food security brief concedes that the effects of reduced applications earlier this season “are likely to become visible only later in harvest outcomes.” Translate that from institutional language into plain English and it means this. The damage is already done, it is already in the ground, and we are simply waiting for it to arrive on the shelf.
Now check the calendar. Six to twelve months from the spring planting season lands us squarely in late 2026 and early 2027. Which is precisely when the strongest El Niño in the instrumental record is forecast to peak, bringing its signature droughts to Southeast Asia, Australia, southern Africa, northern Brazil, and South Asia, the very regions that grow the world’s rice, sugar, and oilseeds.
The World Bank warns openly that a strong El Niño “could disrupt multiple crop belts simultaneously” on top of the conflict-driven input costs. Their baseline projection assumes the Middle East disruptions ease by autumn. What in the last two years of Middle East history suggests that assumption is safe?
The System Has No Slack Left
The comfortable answer is that global markets always adjust. But adjustment requires slack, and the slack is gone. Global cereal production is expected to decline from last year’s records even before El Niño does its work. The UN World Food Programme, hardly a den of right-wing preppers, is calling this the most significant disruption to its supply chains since Covid and the invasion of Ukraine, and its supply chain director put the stakes bluntly.
Today’s supply chain challenges are tomorrow’s hunger crisis.
There is also a political dimension that markets cannot price. When food gets scarce, governments do not behave like economists. They behave like politicians. Export bans, hoarding mandates, and panic buying at the national level turned the modest rice shortfall of 2008 into a global crisis, and analysts are already warning that import-dependent nations are the first dominoes.
The 2015-16 Super El Niño, a far weaker event than what is now forecast, threw tens of millions into food stress across Africa and Asia. This one is projected to be stronger, and it arrives with fertilizer already rationed by price and shipping lanes already contested by missiles.
What Joseph Knew
Scripture does not treat preparation for lean years as faithlessness. It treats it as wisdom delivered in advance to those willing to act on it.
Behold, there come seven years of great plenty throughout all the land of Egypt: And there shall arise after them seven years of famine; and all the plenty shall be forgotten in the land of Egypt.
Joseph did not respond to that warning with a hashtag or a committee. He stored grain during the years of abundance, and when the famine came, Egypt stood while its neighbors begged. The lesson is not that famine is certain. It is that the time to prepare is precisely when preparation still looks optional.
Nobody who filled a pantry in a year of plenty has ever regretted it, and nobody standing in an empty aisle has ever been glad he waited for certainty.
None of this calls for panic, and panic is the enemy of sound judgment anyway. It calls for the same unglamorous prudence our grandparents considered ordinary. Keep some cash margin, know your local growers, and put real food in deep storage while it is cheap and available, because the entire arc of this story is that cheap and available is a closing window.
Families looking for a straightforward place to start can visit Heaven’s Harvest and use promo code Patriot for 15 percent off long-term storable food. The forecasts may yet soften, the strait may yet reopen, and we should pray they do. But hope is a fine thing to hold and a foolish thing to eat.
