In January 2025, during a podcast recorded in Austin, Texas, Joe Rogan and actor Mel Gibson engaged in a discussion that included dismissive remarks about climate science. At the same time, Gibson's home in California was reportedly affected by the Palisades wildfire, which was exacerbated by climate change factors such as reduced rainfall and increased wind intensity, as noted by World Weather Attribution.

Despite the destruction of his property, Gibson expressed skepticism about climate science, questioning the validity of scientific claims and suggesting that the financial motivations behind climate solutions were suspect. Rogan echoed these sentiments, asserting that misinformation surrounding climate change is prevalent and that narratives are often driven by profit motives.

The conversation also included criticisms of California Governor Gavin Newsom, with Rogan inaccurately claiming that the state allocated no funds for wildfire prevention, despite evidence that California had increased its wildfire resilience spending significantly in recent years. This reflects a broader trend of politicizing factual information, where partisan perspectives overshadow empirical data.

Additionally, the discussion veered into controversial health claims, with both men promoting unverified treatments for various ailments, which could pose risks to public health. Gibson's comments about his personal health and the remedies he endorsed were presented without caution regarding their potential dangers.

The disparity in recovery options for wealthy individuals like Gibson, who can afford to rebuild or relocate, contrasts sharply with the challenges faced by lower-income residents affected by similar disasters. This situation underscores the inequities in how climate change impacts different socioeconomic groups, raising questions about the responsibilities of those who contribute significantly to environmental degradation.

Overall, the dialogue between Rogan and Gibson serves as a reflection of the ongoing struggle against misinformation in the context of climate science and public health, highlighting the need for a more informed and equitable approach to these critical issues.