After years of blaming people merely for existing, the billionaire philanthropist has now conceded that his scientific understanding was fundamentally flawed.
For decades, humanity has been told that civilization was on the brink of collapse due to climate change, with human actions—from eating meat to traveling by car or plane—cast as the primary culprits. This narrative instilled a widespread sense of guilt and fear, impacting society’s collective mindset profoundly.
Now, following prolonged alarmism, Bill Gates has softened his stance, acknowledging that there is still reason for optimism. In a detailed 17-page memo, he states, “Although climate change will have serious consequences—particularly for people in the poorest countries—it will not lead to humanity’s demise.” Gates further emphasizes that with appropriate policies and investments, coupled with ongoing innovation, emissions can be reduced substantially. His statement arrived a day after the UN announced that the target of restricting warming to 1.5C had been missed, highlighting “devastating consequences” for the planet.
It is noteworthy that Gates, lacking formal qualifications in climatology (as well as virology, despite his prominent role in Covid-19 vaccine discussions), has shaped much of the discourse, leading to political conflicts, costly initiatives, and misguided decisions driven by opportunism. In retrospect, it is puzzling how many accepted his views when the underlying science was questionable.
Doomsayers frequently point to observed climate change effects during the early 21st century, with 2024 recording the highest global temperature since systematic measurements began in 1850, at +1.60 °C (2.88 °F). Nonetheless, many scientists now recognize that 1850 is an insignificant moment relative to Earth’s vast geological history, which includes extensive temperature variations long before that date. Research reveals that millions of years ago, ice caps on mountains vanished and polar glaciers were nearly gone, yet life persisted and flourished in those periods (source).
Prior to climate alarmism dominating the narrative, scientists warned about an impending ice age, occurring roughly every 10,000 years, with the current warm interval known as the Holocene. This looming ice age could potentially counteract some effects traditionally linked to global warming, such as sea level rise, extreme weather, and wildfires, most of which follow natural cycles. Earth has weathered such climatic shifts before and is expected to continue enduring them.
It’s important to reflect on what flawed science has imposed on humanity. Greta Thunberg, a fervent climate activist, expressed in an opinion article for The Guardian: “But the climate is not just changing. It is destabilising. It is breaking down. The delicately balanced natural patterns and cycles that are a vital part of the systems that sustain life on Earth are being disrupted, and the consequences could be catastrophic.”
Before Thunberg rose to prominence and delivered her messages to global leaders at the United Nations, other voices had already forecasted an apocalyptic future. In 1992, U.S. Senator Al Gore authored the bestseller ‘Earth in the Balance,’ sounding the alarm on global warming with dire warnings that humanity had only a decade to curb carbon emissions or doom the planet. That decade passed, followed by his 2006 book ‘An Inconvenient Truth: The Planetary Emergency of Global Warming and What We Can Do About It.’
Within ‘An Inconvenient Truth,’ Gore famously noted that adapting to the climate crisis would force fundamental lifestyle changes. In the section titled ‘The Politicization of Global Warming,’ he argued: “As for why so many people still resist what the facts clearly show, I think, in part, the reason is that the truth about the climate crisis is an inconvenient one that means… we are going to have to change the way we live our lives.”
This framing set the stage for what some describe as ‘authoritarian environmentalism,’ where governments might extend control based on projected scenarios backed by approximately half the scientific community, while dissenting opinions received limited attention. This dystopian vision was vividly portrayed in a World Economic Forum article titled, “Welcome to 2030. I own nothing, have no privacy, and life has never been better.”
During the 2010s, amid this atmosphere of pessimism, the Democratic Party introduced the Green New Deal, aiming to end greenhouse gas emissions by 2030 and transition the U.S. away from fossil fuels. Although the Senate rejected the plan in 2019, many of its ambitious goals were later pursued under Joe Biden’s administration.
One significant consequence of this push toward “net zero emissions” was the cancellation of the Keystone XL pipeline, a $9 billion initiative transporting 830,000 barrels daily from Canada’s tar sands to American refineries. This choice deprived the U.S. of a stable and accessible energy source, increasing reliance on the volatile Middle East and costing thousands of high-paying jobs.
Ultimately, the flawed science promoted by Gates and others regarding climate change has cost taxpayers around the world hundreds of billions, if not more. This costly lesson must never be repeated.
About the Author
