Bill Gates Says Climate Change ‘Will Not Lead to Humanity’s Demise’

Bill Gates calls for climate fight to shift focus from curbing emissions to reducing human suffering​

In a memo released Tuesday, Gates said the world’s primary goal should instead be to prevent suffering, particularly for those in the toughest conditions in the world’s poorest countries.

Three tough truths about climate​

• Climate change is serious, but we’ve made great progress. We need to keep backing the breakthroughs that will help the world reach zero emissions.
• But we can’t cut funding for health and development—programs that help people stay resilient in the face of climate change—to do it.
• It’s time to put human welfare at the center of our climate strategies, which includes reducing the Green Premium to zero and improving agriculture and health in poor countries.

Emissions projections have gone down, and with the right policies and investments, innovation will allow us to drive emissions down much further.

This is a chance to refocus on the metric that should count even more than emissions and temperature change: improving lives. Our chief goal should be to prevent suffering, particularly for those in the toughest conditions who live in the world’s poorest countries.

To be clear: Climate change is a very important problem. It needs to be solved, along with other problems like malaria and malnutrition. Every tenth of a degree of heating that we prevent is hugely beneficial because a stable climate makes it easier to improve people’s lives.

essentialsaltes said:

To be clear: Climate change is a very important problem. It needs to be solved, along with other problems like malaria and malnutrition. Every tenth of a degree of heating that we prevent is hugely beneficial because a stable climate makes it easier to improve people’s lives.

Click to expand...

People dont read the article to see where Bill Gates said that. Instead they stupidly extrapolate from a headline according to their own preferences to conclude that agw is a hoax - or even just that Mr Gates thinks so.

Landon Caeli said:

Bill Gates, the Microsoft co-founder who has spent billions of his own money to raise the alarm about the dangers of climate change, is now pushing back against what he calls a “doomsday outlook” and appears to have shifted his stance on the risks posed by a warming planet.

he wrote. “People will be able to live and thrive in most places on Earth for the foreseeable future.”

It arrives a week before world leaders gather in Belém, Brazil, for the United Nations annual climate summit, known this year as COP30. Mr. Gates, who turned 70 on Tuesday and has attended the event in previous years, will not be participating.

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/10/28/climate/bill-gates-climate-change-humanity.html?unlocked_article_code=1.w08.otzW.hDLZWjtDtQNF&smid=url-share

Click to expand...

When I have more time I will write a more elaborate respond, but for short:
1) Bill Gates isn't a scientist - and certainly not a climatologist
2) I have never seen a scientist claiming that humanity would die out due to global warming
3) Between "not dying" out and "no reason to worry", there is quite a stretch. There is still a lot of room for a lot of suffering.

Deniers don't listen to anyone until they say the same things they think.


It's hard to take a person seriously when they do that. Even moreso when they misunderstand/misrepresent the person.

Landon Caeli said:

Is it safe to say then, that the climate change emergency, was science fiction? And that the scientists used biased models in their data sets?

...Or was this a political lever the whole time?

WHO LIED TO US..???? And WHY..??

Click to expand...

To be clear.
You now feel this is a legitimate question to be asked because a COMPUTER PROGRAMMER has shifted their outlook on man's resilience to withstand climate change increase.
At no point does he say it was a hoax or it's not happenning; nor does he say it doesn't deserve attention.


It's not safe to say; it's stupid to say. BOTH of those things are stupid to say. Actually, all 3 of those things are stupid to say.

Not safe.

Dumb.

Landon Caeli said:

WHO LIED TO US..???? And WHY..??

Click to expand...

Conservatives, climate change deniers and the fossil fuel industry.
Why? Some lie because they simply don't want to face their responsibility for messing up the planet, the fossil fuel industry lies to preserve their profit, others and some politicians lied because their state or constituency depends on coal mining.

rambot said:

Deniers don't listen to anyone until they say the same things they think.


It's hard to take a person seriously when they do that. Even moreso when they misunderstand/misrepresent the person.

Click to expand...

Indeed. But you don't write a post for the person you are replying to only. You are also - and actually more -write an answer for everybody that reads that answer: the doubter, the casual visitor etc.

Perpetual Student said:

Indeed. But you don't write a post for the person you are replying to only. You are also - and actually more -write an answer for everybody that reads that answer: the doubter, the casual visitor etc.

Click to expand...

Fair point

His change in tone (going from alarmist-adjacent, to "it'll be fine, let's just take a deep breath") certainly didn't manifest out of thin air.

He put out this memo in the short lead-up to the COP30 summit.

That summit is being hosted in Brazil (a BRICS nation), and it's been speculated for quite some time that the BRICS/BRICS+ nations will be making some moves, and agenda setting and the strategizing of BRICS financing frameworks are supposed to be a huge part of that summit.

When you look at the roster of BRICS/BRICS+ nations...it's the who's who of the "oil rich" and "oil reliant".

For a refresher, the BRICS+ roster includes:
Brazil
Russia
India
China
South Africa
Iran
UAE
Egypt
Saudi Arabia

(goes without saying, eliminating fossil fuels isn't as high on their priority list as it is for western countries)

And the purpose of it was to create an economic alliance and financial power structure to compete as an alternative to "western-dominated" global economics.

Like any businessman, I would imagine Gates is toning down the eco rhetoric a bit into a more "BRICS-friendly" version of messaging in order to make sure he's covered regardless of which side wins. (the same way the tech giants got a lot more friendly with Trump once they realized that there was a solid chance he was going to win 2024)

I imagine he won't be the last high profile person, who was "die hard environmentalist" before, to reign it in a little.