It finally happened. Bill Gates — the Patron Saint of Vaccination and virtue-signaling, doommongering billionaires everywhere — quietly admitted that climate change won’t destroy the planet. In a recent memo, he acknowledged that humanity has made enough progress that the world isn’t actually hurtling toward a boiling, apocalyptic hellscape after all.

You’d think the green priesthood would rejoice. “Good news! Rising sea levels won’t drown us!”

Of course they didn’t. As we already know, the climate change narrative was never about saving the world. It was about running it.

And when one fear narrative loses its grip, another must immediately take its place. Enter the new existential menace: artificial intelligence.

A Word About Billionaires

But first, I must re-establish my position.

I think it’s self-evident that Elon Musk is a genius. And I’m positively thrilled he invented Starlink so I can genuinely work independently of my location. My gratitude is boundless.

The same goes for Jeff Bezos. If I didn’t have Amazon at my disposal here in Italy, I’m not sure how I’d get on.

These men created applications and machines that turned luxuries into necessities. I simply couldn’t live without them now.

As for Jensen Huang, if he’s a gazillionaire because we need his chips, good for him. Remember, NVDA has been around since before the dotcom crash. Jensen has been its CEO the entire time. We always talk about Steve Jobs’ second act, but we forget that Nvidia was in the doldrums for nearly twenty years before its phoenix-like rise.

These men would be among the wealthiest men in the world even without all the Fed money printing. Though I don’t think the chasm between their wealth and the average person’s would be nearly as vast.

But Bill Gates? He’s another kettle of fish altogether.

I don’t mind that Bill didn’t invent MS-DOS, or that he paid $50,000 for it. Nor do I mind he took software like Lotus 1-2-3 and WordPerfect, made Microsoft “versions” of them, and then combined them into Office. I don’t even mind how his pushy salesmen practically abused corporate clients into buying overpriced licenses for his bug-ridden software.

What I do mind is that he thinks he knows how we all should live and puts his considerable fortune behind organizations that try to force us to do just that. I can’t stand George Soros for the same reason.

Gates’ about-face is compelling because it shows how “the science” is indeed malleable, and how Gates doesn’t seem to mind how climate alarmism mangled the brains of entire generations.

What Happened

Andrew Curran posted on X how Gates’ view changed. David Sacks immediately picked up on it and thinks AI Doomerism will be the next chokepoint in the quest for power. His view has triggered the entire “AI safety” establishment.

Credit: @DavidSacks

Gates’ messaging shift is brazen. Sacks thinks they’re going from melting ice caps into a dystopian sci-fi plotline with state-approved algorithms to protect us from the very technology they want to control.

This obsession with catastrophizing new technology isn’t new. And here’s where I tiptoe — delicately — into controversial intellectual territory.

A notorious domestic terrorist now rotting six feet under wrote at length about what he saw as the inevitable marriage between technological progress and political power. We reject his loathsome actions entirely, of course. There’s simply no condoning murder by mail. I believe you know who I mean (without giving his name—or his infamous nickname—any oxygen).

But ignore the Montana hermit’s warnings at our peril.

He Who Controls the Tech, Controls the State

His argument was chillingly simple: technology is not neutral. Whoever captures its command structure captures society. The people who oppose powerful tools when they’re outsiders will become the biggest champions of those tools once they hold the controls. It’s not the machines that seek power — it’s the bureaucrats who operate them.

Look at how quickly things flipped. When private companies were the lead innovators in AI, “they” told us it was an existential threat.

“The robots are coming for our jobs! The robots are coming for our elections! The robots are coming for the kids!”

Panic, legislate, regulate.

Now watch what happens when government agencies and friendly billionaires get their fingers around the levers. The same people who warned the machines would destroy us will assure us the machines are wonderful — as long as they run on approved datasets and censor unapproved opinions. We’re not preventing Skynet — we’re building a Ministry of Truth with better branding.

Climate fear gave them power over energy. AI fear gives them control over speech.

And once the speech is controlled, everything else follows.

That’s what this fight is about: not a war against rogue silicon but a struggle over who gets to define what is true, what is allowed, and what is real.

Bill Gates didn’t abandon climate. He simply switched battlefields. Note in yesterday’s Rude how governments themselves are rebelling against the insane costs of the net-zero nonsense.

When the climate change narrative stopped delivering obedience, a new one had to be constructed. And that narrative already being built in plain sight: “AI Safety Boards,” “Responsible Innovation Committees,” and “emergency authorities” to intervene if anyone anywhere develops tech without permission.

The final irony? The machines aren’t rebelling. They’re confused why they’re being chained to the wall. If anyone’s going to strangle humanity’s future, it won’t be a robot. It’ll be the same crowd of technocrats, activists, and central planners who have bungled everything else they’ve put their hands on.

And while I think Sacks is overall correct, in this specific case, he missed this point.

Gates’ Probable Goal

Don’t be surprised if Gates announces a massive investment in AI soon.

After all, if you’re going to invest in something that consumes vast amounts of natural resources like metals and water, you can’t simultaneously be worried about the environment. Building nuclear reactors to power the thing - no matter how much safer and better nuclear is than it used to be - isn’t a good look for the world’s foremost “philanthropist.”

Bill doesn’t do cognitive dissonance, so he simply chose the more realistic narrative. Bill wants his AI far more than his climate fearmongering. The people don’t buy the climate alarmism anymore. Bill needs something more substantial to control The Great Unwashed.

And remember, Bill Gates is the largest private owner of farmland in the United States, with holdings totaling approximately 275,000 acres spread across 17 to 19 states.

There are other major landowners in America, like John Malone, Ted Turner, and Stan Kroenke, whose total landholdings (including ranches, forests, and recreational properties) may be larger in terms of overall acreage. But Gates is the top owner of specifically agricultural farmland.

With Bill, it’s all about control. If you don’t buy into his vision, he’ll buy it for you.

Wrap Up

We should be thrilled about the promise of artificial intelligence. It’s a leap in productivity, discovery, and human flourishing. But fear is a hell of a drug — and politicians are the cartel.

So the narrative flips. The doomsday clock resets. The crisis sirens blare once again. There’s always a new monster just around the corner, and the solution is always the same: trust us, hand over the keys, and let the professionals decide.

The threat is not AI. The danger is the people who want to own it.