The Gates Shift on Net Zero
Always looking for a better grift.
JUPPLANDIA
The Net Zero Agenda is in trouble.
Donald Trump’s second term drives a significant stake through the Globalist drive for Net Zero, and even its strongest advocates are beginning to acknowledge that. The trouble with global ambition is that there is a whole world of people waiting to oppose it. The second trouble with global ambition is the remaining power and influence of the US, perhaps the only nation state other than China atill in a position to shift the paradigm if it defies Globalist intentions.
This of course is why it was so important for them to prevent a 2nd Trump term, and why they did everything imaginable to prevent it.
First, what is Net Zero exactly?
The claim is that it’s a radical but necessary shift in the basis of modern industrial development. It’s needed to Save the Planet, and it involves developing new technologies and energy sources, shifting away from polluting oil based technology and ‘greenhouse gases’ that increase carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Why? Because carbon in the atmosphere heats the planet and climate modelling predictions tell us that this will cause an apocalyptic catastrophe.
I’m not going to go into the various ways this argument is bullshit, scientifically illiterate and dependent on purely speculative and frequently wrong modelling that is little better than inspecting the entails of a goat to predict the future. That’s not what this article is about. The pro and anti climate change arguments have been run through again and again.
What’s important is that Net Zero, which involved an awful lot of self harm for developed nations such as pushing up energy prices and both household and industrial bills to the point where economies are severely damaged, was the settled and decided upon policy of the western nations and of the transnational bodies like the UN that had become more powerful than most individual nations (who tend to follow the lead of the UN even when not legally obliged to do so).
And that seems to be shifting.
That shift is reflected in a change in the rhetoric of Bill Gates, one of the world’s most powerful advocates of Globalist policies like Net Zero. A few years ago (in 2021, at the height of his influence on his other great obsession, pandemics) Bill wrote a book called How to Avoid a Climate Disaster: The Solutions We Have and the Breakthroughs We Need. In that book Bill’s position was very clear-climate change is real, climate change is caused by carbon emissions and human activity, and only the radical transformation of the entire energy supply and industrial output and underpinnings of modern society (Net Zeto, getting that carbon imprint to 0%) will avert vast scale disaster:
“Zero is what we need to aim for. To stop the warming and avoid the worst effects of climate change-and these effects will be very bad-humans need to stop adding greenhouse gases to the atmosphere.
This sounds difficult, because it will be. The world has never done anything quite this big. Every country will need to change its ways. Virtually every activity in modern life-growing things, making things, getting around from place to place-involves releasing greenhouse gases….Yet if nothing else changes, the world will keep providing greenhouse gases, climate change will keep getting worse, and the impact on humans will in all likelihood be catastrophic.”
The scale of Net Zero then, at least, was openly admitted by Gates as he was pushing for it. He himself described it as the greatest undertaking in human history, since no civilisation had ever before rejected its entire existing technology and sought to create, from nothing, a wholly new basis for complex developed society. It wasn’t just a switch from diesel engines to electric vehicles, and it wasn’t just a search for cleaner energy sources or shutting down coal fired power stations. It didn’t ask for a reduction of emissions or a slowing of emissions-it asked for ZERO percent emissions which meant, rather insanely, that we were supposed to believe that vast, complex, huge populations with vast, complex, huge requirements could all be sustained, serviced and survive with no unwanted byproducts, no environmental or ecological costs of any kind, and with less impact in terms of carbon in the atmosphere than an Iron Age society burning cow pats for fuel would have.
Gates admitted the vast scale of the enterprise, but not the vast insanity of the enterprise. And that was before anyone got into whether it really was necessary, or whether the climate models were wrong, the reasons for advocating for it were dishonest, and the whole thing was a campaign designed to concentrate power and control in the hands of those demanding these radical transformations and funding and supplying the new technologies being mandatorily imposed on the rest of us.
In the same work Gates described devastating mega-disasters, huge storms, droughts, famines, floods, tsunamis and tornadoes and typhoons, as the inevitable consequence of not pushing for Net Zero. He, and other advocates of climate catastrophism and Net Zero policy, did this with hysterical emotive rhetoric. Gates for example described a poor African family trying to survive all these terrible climate costs, inflicted by a selfish western world addicted to its cheap energy and travel. All that radical change of everything? Well, under Net Zero, it included telling you to give up burgers and eat worms, or forego being able to afford the heating for your house in winter. The combination was clear-highly emotional appeals regarding supposed disasters to come, and highly restrictive changes to how most people in the West are currently living.
This hairshirt climate apocalypse demand, put into policy as Net Zero, has had predictably negative economic impacts, and met with gradually more and more public resistance from the populations being told that they must suffer for the greater good of the planet. Now, too, it has Donald Trump withdrawing the US from all of it, which means the biggest market and the richest country aren’t playing the game according to Net Zero rules and aren’t putting the required hair shirts on their ordinary voters. It’s all well and good the UK and Europe willingly destroying their own standards of living and economies, but the Globalists knew that they needed the US to do so as well. And they can’t have Trump running around laughing at windmills either, not if they want Net Zero to be taken seriously.
Gates has now produced a memorandum shifting his previous position. And it’s in response to both the difficulty that’s been had selling this punish yourself agenda and the Trump adninistration serving as an immovable barrier to it within the massively influential US market. His letter, published on Tuesday, can be found here:
https://www.gatesnotes.com/work/save-lives/reader/three-tough-truths-about-climate
(highlight and click to open).
In his letter and in follow up interviews Gates now (rather shamelessly) portrays himself as a rational opponent of the climate catastrophism he was actually still pushing as recently as March of this year. Now, he says, there are more important things than getting to a level of ‘net zero’ on emissions. We should reject climate alarmism and recognise that humanity, if the temperature increases, is likely to adapt and survive, or even thrive. It’s the exact opposite of everything that Gates and other climate alarmists have been pushing for decades, and enough to make Greta’s blood boil, if she ever casts an eye back towards her original interest and away from the trendier focus on Jew bashing she has now adopted.
The Gates memorandum, which comes in time to push the kind of advocacy and approach we will see at the upcoming COP30 Climate Hoax super gathering, now presents us with a world in which the worst fears are allayed because technology is already getting better:
“Although climate change will have serious consequences—particularly for people in the poorest countries—it will not lead to humanity’s demise. People will be able to live and thrive in most places on Earth for the foreseeable future. Emissions projections have gone down, and with the right policies and investments, innovation will allow us to drive emissions down much further.
Unfortunately, the doomsday outlook is causing much of the climate community to focus too much on near-term emissions goals, and it’s diverting resources from the most effective things we should be doing to improve life in a warming world.”
There’s been, amusingly, some push back on this from fellow travellers in the Climate Hoax caravan. After all, Gates spent at least a decade rowing in the same direction as them, was something of a navigator for the whole movement especially as it interacted with billionaire interests, and is now telling them that they are fantasists and alarmists (the way some of us were telling them all along). Like the shift we have seen on COVID, with so many fanatical Covidians becoming slightly embarrassed and telling everyone they never wanted to force anyone to comply, the loudest grifters and profiteers soon become the most softly spoken reasonable types when the backing of the power of the US leaves their side.
Gates has always been smarter than any Greta type figure, or than any of the hysterical middle class Greens of the West he was for so long strongly aligned with. For Gates, it’s the grift that matters, the advantage to be had from the movement, rather than the movement itself. When getting government to match his ‘philanthropic’ investments in Net Zero technologies was easy, Gates was pushing at an open door, and happy to do so. When the door is closed, he starts to look for another one. It’s not that he is emotionally and deeply invested as a human being in saving us from pandemics or from a warming planet, it’s that both things provided convenient vehicles for the protection and extension of his wealth, power and influence (under a philanthropic guise of helping mankind).
The shift in his rhetoric now is a typically hard headed business assessment of the political climate he’s facing, not a reflection on what was once true about the atmospheric climate, and is no longer true. And it’s a proof of the reason for the diversity of his philanthropic interests. The artificial foods line meets public distaste and struggles? Well, there’s still pharmaceuticals to sell and medical technology to fund. The vaccines get a bit of pushback after overstretching to the point of backing an mRNA experiment that killed people? Well, there’s different vaccines to sell, or Green energy to push. The Green energy gig might be up, at least in its most extreme forms? Well, then, it’s back to the philanthropy in new ways.
Bill tells us we need to invest in saving Africa, or technologies that mitigate climate change rather than ones that claim to prevent it. It’s a tactical pivot, with the aim of sustaining, however he can, that public-private partnership that enriches everyone like him. You don’t like the Net Zero too much? Not to worry, I have an alternative right here.
If you want a much more in depth treatment of how Bill operates, still the best summary you’ll find, I will brazenly suggest you read my own book on the man, Gates of Hell: Why Bill Gates is the most Dangerous Man in the World (available at Amazon and direct from Bombardier).
From everything I learned researching that volume, I suspect the big grift will go on, one way or another. If it’s not Net Zero, it will Next Zero, some huge scheme that desperately requires you and your government to buy whatever Gates is invested in. Bill’s too good an operator to be frozen out for long. More ‘philanthropy’, and AI too, would be my first bets.
This article (The Gates Shift on Net Zero) was created and published by Jupplandia and is republished here under “Fair Use”
••••
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)
••••
Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.
••••
Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
••••
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of The Liberty Beacon Project.
Leave a Reply