Last Tuesday, as the strongest Atlantic storm in 90 years slammed the western coast of Jamaica with 185-mph winds, Bill Gates was downplaying climate change.
The billionaire does not appear to have publicly addressed the disaster in Jamaica, which extended throughout the Caribbean, with Melissa having killed dozens across Cuba, Haiti, the Bahamas, and the Dominican Republic. And his overall point, frankly, does not hold up to scrutiny.
Gates isn’t alone; climate change has slipped down the world’s priority list in the past few years—and it shows. Governments and corporations are shelving emissions goals, budgets are being redirected from climate initiatives to warfare, the media is pivoting away from climate journalism, and even activists are urging a softer, more “hopeful” tone. It all signals a vibe shift in how we talk about climate change, reframing it from the existential risk it actually poses to a less urgent, peripheral issue—even as the floodwaters reach our front doors.
Fact Check: List of claims about Bill Gates includes falsities
Not to defend the guy but there are enough real skeletons in his closet. We don’t need to spread misinformation.
Melinda shit canned his ass for good reasons.
Respectfuly, if you want to fact check someone atleast say what fact you are checking. Although perhaps I could have been more clear.
For the record, Bill Gates is complicit in the genocide in Gaza
And he has connections with Epstein who on top of the whole child rape side gig was very successful at laundering money to send to Israel.
For both of these to support your argument, you must be saying that owning stock in a company that benefits from business or weapons that benefit Israel makes the stockholder “complicit in the genocide in Gaza”. If you’re saying that than probably about 60% of Americans would be “complicit in the genocide in Gaza” as they have stock including index total market funds or S&P 500 funds which have fractions of shares in many of those same companies.
That seems like an overly broad definition to me, but if that is your definition, then your claim is true.
This one just talks about Gates being involved with Israel on climate change actions without any Gates involvement in Gaza. So have to assume your position is that being involved with Israel on issues affecting all of us globally is also an endorsement of genocide. That too, seems like an extreme position.
Please stop with all your critical thinking. /s
deleted by creator