Epstein files reveal dark climate views: nature as population control

Newly released documents from the US Department of Justice's Epstein files have exposed the disgraced financier's disturbing private views on climate change, revealing that he casually framed environmental catastrophe not as a crisis but as nature's mechanism for population control. Anadolu's Greenline analysis of email exchanges between 2013 and 2016 shows Epstein repeatedly challenging mainstream climate science while weaving in dark, eugenics-tinged commentary about human survival.

Disturbing Correspondence with Scientists

In July 2016 emails to cognitive scientist Joscha Bach, Epstein wrote: "Maybe climate change is a good way of dealing with overpopulation… the earths forest fire. potentially a good thing for the species too many people." He pushed the analogy further, suggesting society has no obligation to support its elderly or infirm members, comparing it to the brain pruning unused neurons. Earlier correspondence with physicist Lawrence Krauss, then director of Arizona State University's Origins Project, showed Epstein questioning climate science while offering congratulations on Krauss's New York Times op-ed about scientific warnings.

Dismissing Climate Consensus

In December 2016, Epstein forwarded climate denialist content to Krauss, questioning whether the South Pole was actually cooling and gaining ice. Krauss firmly countered, pointing out that cherry-picking data ignores the scientific consensus established since the IPCC's 1988 founding. He noted that the West Antarctic Ice Sheet is melting at unprecedented rates, with potential sea-level rise of roughly one meter if lost. Krauss advocated for carbon taxes and direct air capture technologies while dismissing arguments that elevated CO₂ levels benefit humanity.

Context of Elite Connections

These exchanges were part of Epstein's broader pattern of engaging with prominent scientists, often at his Zorro Ranch in New Mexico, where he hosted figures from elite research institutions and indulged fantasies about human improvement and population dynamics. The emails reveal a man who consistently challenged climate consensus through the lens of population reduction and selective survival, viewing ecological disaster not as a threat requiring action but as a potential tool for human culling.

Scientific Rebuttal

Krauss's responses to Epstein demonstrated the patience of mainstream science confronting denialism, providing evidence-based counterarguments while questioning whether anyone truly wants increased Arctic vegetation at the cost of catastrophic climate disruption. The exchanges, now public through the Epstein Files Transparency Act, offer a window into how the convicted sex offender's disturbing worldview extended beyond his criminal activities into philosophical musings about humanity's future—musings that scientists firmly rejected even as they maintained professional engagement with their wealthy patron.