The Highwire with Del Bigtree - THUNDERSTRUCK: GATES COOLS ON CLIMATE CATASTROPHE

Episode Date: November 13, 2025

After decades as one of the loudest voices warning of climate catastrophe, Bill Gates now concedes that climate change will not wipe out humanity—and admits “net zero” is likely unattainable. Yet aggressive emission mandates persist, including livestock feed additives designed to curb methane, which critics say are harming animal health and linked to unexplained cattle deaths.Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-highwire-with-del-bigtree--3620606/support.

One of the strongest regular voices in the climate conversation, scaring people about the impending climate doom, Bill Gates has just come out and said this. Take a look. Climate is a super important problem. There's enough innovation here to avoid super bad outcomes. We won't achieve our best goal, the 1.5 or even the 2 degrees. degrees. And as we go about trying to minimize that, we have to frame it in terms of overall human welfare, not just everything should be solely for climate. When the climate activists who

have been very supportive of what you've done and you've been very supportive of what they done, read this. And if Greta Thunberg is reading this and saying to herself, my goodness, he seems like he is reversing himself, what would you tell her? I'd say wasn't the goal here to improve human lives. And shouldn't we, in our awareness of how little generosity there is to help measure, you know, should we get them a measles vaccine or should we do some climate-related activity? And if we could take, if we stop funding all vaccines and that, you know, saved you point one degree, would that be a smart trade-off?

That's the kind of question we have to ask. So I'm a climate activist, but I'm also a child survival activist. If you think climate is the only problem, and it's apocalyptic, or if you think climate's not a problem at all, my memo will make no sense to you. You'll be like, oh, no, it should all be climate,

or you'll be like, why are you even still talking about this climate thing? Why do you invest billions of your money into these companies. The middle position that climate is super important but has to be considered in terms of overall human welfare, I didn't pick that position because it's a, you know, everybody agrees with it. It's, I think, intellectually, the right answer.

Wow. I mean, first of all, I mean, we're between a rock and a hard place there. He's backing off of climate to get more into vaccines. If it's going to be a tradeoff, I don't want to let go of vaccines. But this is a huge backtrack. Yeah, yeah. It appears and is quite stunning because I think of him as one of the great, you know, inciters of climate terror. Yeah, just intuitively, the guy waves his arms around a lot when he's talking.

What is he trying to convey? What's that message you're trying to convey that? He wants you to really listen to him by doing this, Del. And so when he's talking, he's talking about a memo. I just wrote this memo. So in this memo, and like you said, he's one of the strongest voices out there for this climate conversation over this past decade. And you go to the memo, and he says this, literally one of the first paragraphs,

although climate change will have serious consequences, particularly for poor people in 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. Well, this is interesting because we have a whole younger generation that is literally it has a mental health disorder and anxiety and having problems with depression because they think the world is going to end in five years. And why are they thinking that?

Well, maybe it's because Bill Gates was talking like this up until now. Take a look. The consequences for human life will be catastrophic. Climate change is the biggest threat to our food supply. since the invention of agriculture. The death hole would be even worse near the equator and the unrest, you know, would be global in nature. The damage that will be done every year

will be greater than what we've seen during this pandemic. CO2 is warming the planet. The natural ecosystems can't adjust to these rapid changes and so you get ecosystem collapses. And that leads to starvation. The deaths will just go up over time as you get more heat waves, forest fires, and most importantly, the inability to go outdoors and do farming.

You go out to 2040, 2050, 2060, it gets substantially worse because even in the best case, temperature increases are continuing. If we're serious about aggressing climate change, we have to invest aggressively in advancing the technology and policies to get to net zero emissions by 2050. If you gave me only one wish for the next 50 years, I can pick who's president, I can I can pick a vaccine, which is something I love, or I could pick this zero-emission technology. This is the wish I would pick. Avoiding a climate disaster will be one of the greatest challenges humans have ever taken on.

And now we're giving up. Biblical Armageddon with every breath he can muster. Or we can live and thrive for the foreseeable future. I don't know. Somewhere in between there. I think destroying people's lives, you know, as it turns out, to achieve some goal that it doesn't look like we can get to. Right. I'm jumping ship.

I'm going to get back to business. Yeah. Sounds like he's what he's saying. And business, like you said, he's a business man. So he's saying, we're going to back off climate a little bit and throw everything into vaccines, immunization. So you could see this coming in the headlines in the months. He's actually late to the party here. So when you look at these headlines, you're seeing a massive backaway by big business, banks.

You can see your Wall Street Journal, Net Zero Banking Alliance, suspends activities amid wave of departures. They're talking to JPMorgan, Citibank, UBS. They're all ditching their green pledges. But then also businesses were supposed to kind of, they had a report they had to give and say, how are you going to help not warm the plan at 1.5 degrees? We need your business plan. And these businesses all are ditching that as well. This was Financial Times.

Companies take step back from making climate target promises by the hundreds. They're all taking a step back from here. So back to what Gates said initially. There is this massive, massive pool of money that's been built up really since the late 60s, since this narrative started. We're going to talk about that in a second. But there's this massive climate funding. Where is this all going? He wants it to go to immunizations.

And so does the entire culture. You're seeing this move. And this is the Lancet. Just from less than two months ago, the Lancet posted this, this is a paper. Climate change and pandemics, a call for action. Well, interesting. And they say in there, well, because of, you know, clearly because of Wuhan. And that was because of climate change, and we need to make sure that never happens again.

So we're having this thing called COP 30. This is the United Nations Climate Action Conference. That's coming up in November here, at the end of November. It's in Brazil. And this is now the focus is immunization. It's not climate anymore. It's climate conference. But they're saying we need to put this all into health because the WHO and all of their

pushes trying to make these plans for health are just getting stopped. at every corner. Kennedy is stopping it. So they're moving this now. So we see they're adding this why yellow fever demands a seat at COP 30s climate negotiations. And you go into this article says integrating health into the plans at the heart of the Paris Agreement nationally determined contributions. Again, huge contributions and unlocking climate finance for immunization campaigns and surveillance. That's what they want. And in Brazil, they have what's called a bellum action plan. So they're sidestepping, they're sidestepping the WHO, the international health regulations, and they're saying we need to integrate climate adaption and resilience into all levels of

health care. How does that work? Well, they're saying health-specific programs, including immunization, disease elimination initiatives, expansion of diagnostic treatment, surveillance, all of this. They want this. They're trying to sneak this in here through the climate conversation because it's not working through the health conversation. So they're trying the back door here. The C. Gates, the pivot was right there in that article. What's so important about this, there have been people that have asked why we got on to this climate issue, right? Isn't your mission statement dedicated to eradicating man-made disease? You know, we have been reporting on pesticides, herbicides, on our crops.

It makes sense to people. We report on fluoride in our water, and of course, vaccines or drugs, and all of the different ways that we're being poisoned in our society. But people say, but where does climate fit into that, right? Why are you getting into this environmental issue? Your show is not really on environmental. I'd argue the environment of your body is very important. But the reason, Jeffrey, and we've been reporting on this,

we've been saying it is all going to come back to health. It is all going to be used against us. This entire control, this authoritarian system that is using a warming planet that you could argue was warmer than this before there ever human beings, had more CO2 before there was ever human beings, and was known to be lush like tropical jungle everywhere. So I don't understand what we're talking about.

CO2 is going to make, you know, collapse of our farming abilities. None of it makes sense. But we knew, Jeffrey, both you and the investigations and because of the international team we work with, that the underpinnings of this at the WHO and the UN was all to come back into authoritarian control over us, our food supply, and most importantly, our bodies. And now Bill Gates has got the big reveal, right?

I've been, we've been collecting all of this money. There was no way we were ever going to actually stop this thing from the one or two degrees, which I think, I'll tell you, Jeffrey, from the beginning, that was a hard sell. It was a hard sell to make people panic over two degrees. Like I just don't know how they thought, but it didn't matter. Now they have all of these billions of dollars of fear funds that they've raised. And what are they going to do? They're going to start using it to do what Joe Biden did, which is to promote, use every media source to try.

Is there going to be another pandemic? What's it going to be? but they are now extremely well-funded to work on their biggest goal, force-vaccinating, controlling you and how your body works in this world. And if people look at the top line of the climate change conversation, they may ask that question, why are you doing this? Why are you covering this? But you dig under that, which I'm going to do right here. And you see the underpinnings of this is about human sovereignty,

it's about how you move about this planet. Can you follow your soul's directive? Can you raise a family how you believe you want to raise that family? The government comes in here. So this all started in the late 60s with the M.I. doomsday prediction, you had limits to growth, and you had the Club of Rome. Club of Rome came out, and I'm going to read some quotes here in a second, but you had the Club of Rome come out and say, humanity is the enemy itself.

And there's a New York Times article, 1976 here. You can see social programming starting to ramp up. A need for change is seen by the Club of Rome. And this is, again, the New York Times, people are being hit with this. They're not even knowing where it's coming because they're saying the carrying capacity of the planet, we don't have enough resources. There's too many people, and the climate's going to be a disaster. It says in this article, in the conditions of the coming times, the necessity of reestablishing a viable world balance between populations and resources, if the present generation is not able to timely adopt the necessary corrective measures will inevitably tend to bring about a technocratic version of Oriental depotism, of which Stalinism and Nazism has already given us an anticipated view.

And that was a professor. They quoted in that article. So imagine you open the New York Times newspaper and you see this and you see limits to growth and you see the planet's going to run out of resources. Well, this came from the Club of Rome. Aurelio Pichai. This is their book in, it's called The First Global Revolution. They tell you in this book what they're going to do. They say, in searching for a new enemy, unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine, and the like would fit the bill. You go to the bottom of this. It says all these threats

are caused by human intervention, and it is only through changes, attributes, and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy, then, he writes, is humanity itself. So it's a perfect, And so, yeah. I mean, it's incredible because what you see is this wasn't based on any science. They weren't like, oh, there's, you know, what they said is, how do we best control humanity? How do we best interfere with them having babies? How do we start controlling how do it's eugenics? How do we, you know, bring about some, you know, happy-go-lucky sounding form of eugenics?

Or how do we get people to do what's right and stop having babies? We make them hate themselves. We make them see themselves as a disease. on this planet. And it's one of the things that I've said politically, having grown up as a liberal, I've said that. I'm politically marooned, although I'm pretty happy with a lot of what I see happening with Robert Kennedy Jr., of course, in this administration. But when I reflect back, what I would say is the primary, if I was going to say now what I believe it meant to, you know, when I consider myself a Democrat, was that people are a disease on this planet. That's in my,

it's in my culture. It was in Boulder, Colorado. It's how I was trained in school. You know, And so that is, and I didn't know where it came from, right? It just seemed obvious. Like, we're the worst thing that's ever happened to the earth. You know, we're proliferating like bunny rabbits around the planet, and we're like this disease that's killing the planet. The animals are more important than we are. The trees are more important than we are.

Of course, now, I mean, and when you look at that that goes against being created in the image and likeness of God, it moves us towards, you know, I would say, in an atheistic society. And then as, you know, I got in this vaccine issue and slowly you take a step back. You're like, what is it? And here we have the roots of it. Make them hate themselves and then we can control them and tell them you're the reason the planet's warming. That's why we have to curb your food supply. That's why we have to take your car away. That's why we have to lock you in your house. That's why we control where you get to come and go because you are bad. And essentially right there in the club of Rome, they've decided you're going to be prisoners on this.

Yeah. And who put that idea in your head? I'd suggest you start with the Club of Rumps. Look at their own writings. And so when you pull that green mask, as it were, off, and you look behind that, you can see this. And then you start looking at the conversation that's out there publicly, and you can see it with different eyes. Here's John Kerry from just a couple of years ago. Watch him try to work through the logic here and fail. Okay. With a growing population on the planet, we just crossed the threshold of 8 billion fellow citizens around the world. We just crossed that in this last year. But emissions from the food system alone are projected to cause another half a degree of warming by mid-century on the current course that we are today. A two-degree future could result in an additional 600 million people not getting enough to eat. And you just can't continue to both warm the planet while also expecting to feed it. doesn't work. So let me get this straight. In order to stop famine in the future and starvation caused by a two-degree rise in temperature, we need to stop making food now and starve people

now. Don't think about it too long. It's going to hurt the head. I think I got that. Great. Good plan. Right. So we have obviously a population that's getting larger on this planet and they need to be fed. And so one of the things you don't want to do is reduce the ability. to feed them, which he's trying to, he's trying to logically work that through. I don't know if he worked that through before he got on stage, but... So you look at that and you say, oh, how would they ever do that? Here's the Netherlands. Here's a recent headline from the Netherlands.

Netherlands ordered by court to slash nitrogen emissions by 2030. Nitrogen fertilizer, the hyper-Bosch method. You want a Nobel Prize for this. This is industrial production of fertilizer that feeds the planet. It's why the population can be fed. Here's a graph just to put this idea into context. If you take away one thing here, in that yellowish line, that Halloween-colored line there, population fed by synthetic nitrogen fertilizers, and we're approaching $8 billion there.

And then that green line is the population supported without synthetic nitrogen fertilizer. So if you cut the fertilizers on the planet, you can feed about 4 billion people, if you're lucky, which is about half our population here. So that is what they're saying. what they're saying. They're trying to put this in really nice speak, but they're saying we just need to cut that because without that, you know, our goals will probably be taken care of there. It's really crazy if you think about it. You have $8 billion. Let's reduce the amount of, you know, nitrogen, the food you can grow down to where we only support $4 million and let the chips fall where they may. I mean, can you imagine what that world looks like? I mean, and this in itself inflicted. They talk about Bill Gates in that, you know, when he used to say there's going to be wars over food. Yeah. Yeah. If you cut like half. of our farming across the world is going to be wars, they are self-inflicting the exact thing that they say that the globe is going to do to us on its own and our environment is going

to do to us on its own. Right. And so let's talk about the ground levels, because these are big ideas. And people sitting at home or listening may go, what can I do here? I'm just along with the ride. But people can do things at home. So Bill Gates is saying we have all these great innovations, so climate change is not a problem anymore.

Let's look at these great innovations that are happening. So one of the things that we were pushing, and there was boycotts going on, was this feed additive that are given to cows to reduce their methane called Beauvais. And what it does, you basically give it to cows, so they fart less. That's the bottom line. And that seems like a great idea. You can't make it up. I can't imagine what the cost of reducing farts from cows is on a global scale right now. And I got to sit here and try to report this with a straight face.

And so we have the cows. Now, this is in the Netherlands. It's in Denmark. it's being mandated. Here's the headlines coming out. It's being given to the cows. Cows are collapsing, says farmers, suspecting statutory feed. And I want to go to now, this is a breaking news video out of Denmark. This is a farmer on the ground, shot the video herself. Listen to what she had to say. It's the law since this year that we have to feed 80 days of Beauvais to our cows. It's a rule. And if you don't do it, it's just like you can go

to the prison or you get like a big fine, a really big fine. We started in the, beginning of October with a low doses and we riced it up till the full doses around 20 of October a little before on the 30th of October we really got problems we have four groups of cows in our stable we have one group with 36 sick cows and the end of the day it started also in two other groups and at that point we really thought it's Beauvais we heard already earlier some problems about other and the signals were really the same. On Friday morning, we had like 70 cows on our health list.

And on Saturday morning it was almost 90. We really don't want to feed it anymore. It's just poison for our cows. They get sick from it. And this is not why we are a farmer. We are a farmer to, of course, produce milk, but also to have a good stable with healthy cows. cows and in this way we cannot keep that up and we expect because a lot of farmers

a lot of countries are also busy with introducing Beauvais to in their country to feed by law to the farmers by the farmers to the cows I would like to say to you guys go against it because if you want to keep on staying a farmer this is not it. This is really not the way to do it. This is grassroots call for action, journalism, whatever you want to, just somebody is saying, stop this madness. And you can see what she said.

It's mandated by the government. So they started, they did the right thing. We started with just a little bit. So we have to give this. Let's just start with a little bit. We can ramp it up to the appropriate quantities that government wants us put in there. And this is what's going on. And you can see, she also put out videos of what happens to the,

cows. I don't know if we have B-roll that, but you can see here. They're dragging this one out. This is one of her cows. Yeah, now that cow's alive, but it can't move. Yeah, it looks great. It looks really well. And it can't stand up, and that's what they're taking it to the sick bay there. And I mean, can we just take a second here and just take this in? I mean, this is again the they that we always talk about, you know, that have these great ideas.

She's got 90 cows like this now, right? And I'm sure she's not alone. there's headlines this is happening all over. And it just begs the question we ask every, every single week on this show, where was the safety studies on this product? Exactly, how did you determine? And I think most of the people watching in our audience recognize now that probably the biggest issue as we look at health in our species is your gut biome.

Yeah. Right? More and more and more is becoming clear. Neurological disorders, let's look at your gut. Depression issues, let's look at your gut. You know, cancer, let's look at your gut. you know, cancer, let's look at your gut. All, I mean, it's coming down to how are we processing food, what's going in, you know, do we have a leaky gut?

And here you have a product where you're taking an animal and you're changing, clearly changing their gut biomes so that they don't produce gas. Right, right. What is that doing to them? Right. You know? One of the most complicated aspects of a living organism. Right. Which really can't be modeled.

You're just throwing a drug in there because climate change. So you ask what's being done? where the safety studies. This is not just a European Union problem. It's made his way over to the United States, and it is in the market now. It's being given to cows here. It's not mandated, thank God, but it is being used here. And what does the FDA say about it? Here's their 2024 letter to the makers, to the manufacturers of Beauvais. This is what they said. Based on a review of your data and the characteristics of your product, FDA has no questions at this time regarding whether Bover 10 will achieve its intended effect and it is expected to pose,

expected to pose low risk to humans. And then you go to the bottom. It says, warning, by the way, not for human use. Caution should be exercised when handling this product. Three nitrooxypropanol may damage male fertility and reproductive organs. It's potentially harmful when inhaled and is a skin and eye irritant. So when we ask about what does climate change have to do with what our show is doing here, this is what it has to do because it's working its way down to the food chain because of...

And causing man-made disease. You cannot tell me when you're doing this to a cow. that is not getting into their milk that we're drinking, the cheese that we're eating, the beef that we're eating, they are poisoning us. And if they didn't do enough studies to see that it's going to just drop cows in the middle of pastures, clearly they haven't done the downstream effect of what is that cow now going to do to the human beings that are consuming the product that comes from them. Right.

And so I sit here with you, this is a call to action because that is the FDA. That was Biden's FDA. We have a new FDA now. That's the veterinary division of the FDA. Yeah. They can change this. They can require further studies. They can stop this in our population of cows right now.

Will they do it? Well, I'll tell you, I got some friends up there. And Bobby, Marty, I'm going to send you a couple videos when we're done with the show today. Hopefully they'll take a look at it and maybe we can get something done. Thank you.