Gordon J. Fulks

Gordon Fulks and an anatomy of denial.

Fulks holds a doctorate in physics from the University of Chicago, Laboratory for Astrophysics and Space Research and although a minor commentator and ‘skeptical scientist’ of AGW he does follow a certain mode of operation.

Fulks writes opinion pieces for newspapers although they tend to be restricted to Oregon. They follow a set pattern

President Barack Obama’s “climate change” speech last month reiterated his assertions that the earth is warming dangerously, that human emissions of carbon dioxide are clearly responsible and that virtually all scientists agree with him. As 115 scientists from around the world told him several years ago: “With all due respect, Mr. President, that is not true.” One was Nobel laureate in physics Ivar Giaever, a Democrat. The president now calls those who dispute his hysteria the “Flat Earth Society.”

The conspiracy theory that AGW is a hoax or at the least a political vehicle is borne out in Fulks’ opinion pieces, and that the ‘consensus’ is challenged by hundreds of scientists- which includes himself.

Because the president knows that Congress and the American people will never support carbon reduction schemes that seriously harm our economy, he is pursuing a strategy involving rhetorical subterfuges while his Environmental Protection Agency quietly moves forward with regulations.

Consequently, 11 of us filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court recently asking it to overturn the EPA’s “endangerment finding” on carbon dioxide. This is the first time that the high court has been asked to consider purely scientific arguments rather than, for instance, the EPA’s failure to follow the recommendations of its inspector general.

We prove that the EPA’s “three lines of evidence” are fatally flawed, based on multiple robust data sets, not on “expert opinion” from those paid to support the president’s position. Honest data show no unusual warming in the latter half of the 20th century and none at all for the past 15 years, despite a slow increase in carbon dioxide. The “hot spot” that must exist in the tropical troposphere for the theory to work is missing. And the climate models, for which the taxpayer has paid so dearly, are epic failures. Without global warming, carbon dioxide is clearly “not guilty.” And hence the hysteria about extreme weather caused by carbon dioxide is likewise nonsense.

An Amicus Brief- ‘friend to the court’ is  information presented by experts to the court- in this case presented to challenge the EPA’s move to define CO2 as a pollutant. The amicus brief is available via the Heartland Institute– perhaps no surprise there and features ‘experts’ who are also Heartland Institute ‘experts’ including Joseph S. D’Aleo, Dr. Timothy F. Ball, Dr. Don J. Easterbrook et al. The legal challenge is a presentation of the usual skeptical arguments. No Hot Spot, AGW based on computer models that fail and current warming is not unprecedented.

As an expert ‘friend to the court’ Gordon Fulks is presenting himself as an expert in climate science. A search reveals that he has written two peered reviewed papers – his PhD thesis [1975] and Techniques for Remote Sensing of Ionospheric Electron Density from a Spacecraft- 1981 – as well as data from prior to 1981. There is a truism that university students upon seeking work are already out of date such is the speed that new information enters science, with a 30 year gap between research into atmospheric physics and today’s climate science it seems improbable that Gordon Fulks is an expert in climate science.

Gordon Fulks presents his full expert bio via his ‘expert’ status with the Oregon thinktank Cascade Policy Institute – a right leaning, free market lobby group with wider funding links to the right wing network of thinktanks. Gordon Fulks bio is in full here– some key sentences:

Dr. Fulks’s background is similar to that of scientists promoting AGW with notable exceptions: he has never accepted ANY money to promote or oppose any theory because that is unethical, and he is considerably more experienced than most who have.

If he has not been doing research and writing peer-reviewed papers as scientists promoting AGW what has he been doing?

Dr. Fulks later worked for a think-tank in Santa Barbara, California, supporting the US Defense Nuclear Agency on nuclear weapon effects. When that agency faded away at the end of the Cold War, he supported the Department of State designing new embassies and working at the US Embassy in Moscow. More recently, he has consulted for business and government clients seeking to better understand electromagnetic phenomena, related scientific scares, and the concept of ‘acceptable risk.’

30 years on from doing research he now is a consultant-as well as writing op-eds for [at least two] regional newspapers. A background very dis-similar to research climate scientists. Part of his consultancy is presentations to ‘thinktanks’ including this piece for the Science and Public Policy Institute which is a dedicated climate denial group that draws frequently on the wisdom of Lord Monckton. In Fulks’ – Environmental Issues: What’s Real and What’s nonsense [pdf] Feb 2011- he presents a gish gallop of themes that condemn environmentalists for bio fuels and palm plantations and the destruction of rain forest, banning DDT and causing 40 million deaths [DDT became ineffective- was banned in developed countries but is used for malaria control to this day but let’s not allow facts to spoil a good polemic]- ozone depletion was natural and nothing to do with CFCs as indeed was acid rain.  All of which is a preamble to –

 brings us to the greatest environmental and scientific scam of our time: Global Warming.

With a brief mention to the letter signed by over a hundred scientists [including himself], presented as an advert by the Cato Institute to tell President  Obama how wrong he is about AGW the argument against AGW grinds to halt with ‘climategate emails’ and renewable energy.

More important, Climategate revealed that some scientists have been cheating in many different ways,
usually mixing a little truth with a whole lot of rubbish.
Because a detailed analysis is beyond what we have the time for today let me just say: Virtually
EVERYTHING Global Warming Alarmists say is wrong,  and NO ‘climate crisis’ exists.
Attempts to save the planet with bio-fuels, wind power, and solar cells are themselves substantial

To fully understand the expert opinion and detail of why Gordon Fulks believes AGW to be a hoax and scam requires reading a piece he did for the Australian No Carbon Tax Climate Sceptics Party during the August 2013 election season. After 20 or so classic denial talking points [including those cheating scientists exposed by ‘climategate’] he ends with-

Who denies that many prominent scientists oppose climate hysteria?

Gordon Fulks PhD who apparently takes no money for his opinion despite representing a couple of ‘thinktanks’ as an expert always leaves his email address with each publication- just in case, perhaps if one is being cynical, to able to accept any offer to get paid as an expert rather than doing it for free. Gordon Fulks has done little with his astrophysics PhD but is does notionally allow him to call himself an astrophysicist which he does on occasion.  Science has no political colour but scientists do and for conservative rightwing the threats and solutions to AGW can be seen as threats to the free market but the denial movement also offers a lucrative income for retired scientists especially if they can cite a PhD in a climate related subject.

The market for skeptical scientists to write op-eds, do speaking tours to the converted and making television appearances is crowded with several non scientists acting as a counter-point to Al Gore. However, Gordon Fulks PhD Astrophysicist has directed his passion in opposition to alternative energy, restrictions of the free market and the scam of AGW to defend those he thinks are victims of the dogma of Climate Change [Fulks is never shy in condemning the hysteria, hoax, religion or its high priests of ACC, especially the lying cheating ones featured in Climategate]

In an op-ed he “criticized Governor Kulongoski for forcing State Climatologist George Taylor out of his position at Oregon State University because he expressed doubts about Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW)” although the facts differed in reality with George Taylor being the State University Climatologist, and the whole issue being a lot murkier. In June 2012 he championed chemist Nickolas Drapela, PhD who lost his job as a lecturer at Oregon State University because of his bizarre conspiracy laden views of AGW which he put into a slide show 4 years earlier [ yes it features Nazis and the new world order]. Despite his AGW denial his rolling contract lasted ten years and along with around 100 temporary contract staff he was laid off. The subplot appears to be the need of OSU as a research university to seek funding for research rather than lecturers.


  1. Gordon J. Fulks, PhD

    While I do not normally respond to personal political attacks from the uneducated and the anonymous, this is sooo typical of those who have no understanding of science that it deserves a reply.

    First of all, bad behavior is not the way science works. When I talked with my fellow astrophysicist, the great Global Warming Guru James Hansen, we found much in common. For instance, we agree that using ethanol as a motor fuel is a total waste. Hansen also supports nuclear power, as I do. And Hansen and I agree about Milankovitch cycles as a major climate driver. While we disagree about carbon dioxide, we know how to carry on a constructive conversation with fellow scientists.

    Second, unlike most who promote the hysteria, I have no conflicts in this matter. It is amazing to be slandered time and again.

    It is also standard nonsense to assert that there are very few skeptics, and we have no expertise. While this person seems willing to admit that there are “hundreds” of scientists who oppose climate hysteria, that should really be tens of thousands who have actually spoken out:


    Note the signature of the legendary physicist, Edward Teller, PhD. Of the 31,487 American scientists who signed the petition 9,029 of us have PhDs.

    In the Open Letter to President Obama that more than a hundred of us signed, many were prominent:

    Yun Akusofu, Ph.D University Of Alaska
    Robert M. Carter, PhD James Cook University
    Roger Cohen, Ph.D Fellow, American Physical Society
    David Douglas, PhD University of Rochester
    Michael Fox, PhD American Nuclear Society
    Gerhard Gerlich, PhD Technische Universitat Braunschweig
    Ivar Giaever, PhD Nobel Laureate, Physics
    Will Happer, PhD Princeton University
    Kiminori Itoh, PhD Yokohama National University
    Madhav Khandekar, PhD Former Editor, Climate Research
    Richard Lindzen, PhD Massachusetts Institute of Technology
    Horst Malberg, Ph.D Free University of Berlin
    Ross McKitrick, PhD University of Guelph
    Patrick J. Michaels, PhD University of Virginia
    Niels-Axel Morner, PhD Stockholm University
    Roy N. Spencer, PhD University of Alabama, Huntsville
    Antonio Zichichi, PhD President, World Federation Scientists

    The text of the letter and the full list of signers are available here:


    Note how the obvious expertise shown by this group far, far exceeds that of the website Mr. Anonymous uses for his talking points. They do not have any PhDs with relevant experience.

    Gordon J. Fulks, PhD (Physics)
    Corbett, Oregon USA

    ED NOTE- a.k.a Mr Anonymous- this site does not attempt to supplement Climate Science research, there are plenty of very good web sites addressing this need- Those who deny the science of AGW will quote many [including scientists who are part of the consensus who are also included]- this site is database of links/ statements and CVs- all of which is publicly available and often in the subjects own words. If there are correction that need to be made please post your concern and they will be updated.

  2. So you are compiling a list of people you disagree with over climate science and its belief in AGW – for what end ?
    who exactly are you hiding in the dark compiling lists ?
    Maybe stick to the developments in science and why that consensus is meaningless.

    ED NOTE_ The list includes those who are cited by persons in denial of the science of AGW- all links and checked and all posts are open to adjustment – the posts are a collection of statements or facts in their own words- i.e. it simply links to subject generated content.

  3. theo1935

    Amigo Gordon es verdad que el calentamiento global de la planeta tierra, no es por culpa de la sociedad humana, sino por los procesos naturales entre el sol y la planeta tierra. Saludos amigo de la ciencia. Domingo Delgado Arellano. Place de LOctroi 4 1227 Carouge. Genéve. SUISS

  4. Just as Nixon’s enemy list backfired so will this list…

    It has already provided me with a tremendous source of links that I didn’t have before. Thanks Gordon J. Fulks, PhD for providing those resources.


    • Joel Batts


      Cornwall Alliance is anti-science eh? Please support that claim. You may find that what’s really behind your comment is disdain for people who are able to keep religious and scientific commitments without needing to be babysat by Richard Dawkins.



    People in the USA, are being told by the U.S. government and media that global warming is man-made. If that is true, how can the government and media explain the high temperatures the earth has experienced in past years when there were far fewer people? Let us look back in the world’s history: for example, between roughly 900AD and 1350AD the temperatures were much higher than now. And, back then there were fewer people, no cars, no electric utilities, and no factories, etc. So what caused the earth’s heat? Could it be a natural occurrence? The temperature graph at the bottom of this article shows the temperatures of the earth before Christ to 2040.

    In the book THE DISCOVERERS published in February 1985 by Daniel J. Boorstin, beginning in chapter 28, it goes into detail about Eric the Red, the father of Lief Ericsson, and how he discovered an island covered in green grass.

    In approximately 983AD, Eric the Red committed murder, and was banished from Iceland for three years. Eric the Red sailed 500 miles west from Iceland and discovered an island covered in GREEN grass, which he named Greenland. Greenland reminded Eric the Red of his native Norway because of the grass, game animals, and a sea full of fish. Even the air provided a harvest of birds. Eric the Red and his crew started laying out sites for farms and homesteads, as there was no sign of earlier human habitation.

    When his banishment expired, Eric the Red returned to congested Iceland to gather Viking settlers. In 986, Eric the Red set sail with an emigrant fleet of twenty-five ships carrying men, women, and domestic animals. Unfortunately, only fourteen ships survived the stormy passage, which carried about four-hundred-fifty immigrants plus the farm animals. The immigrants settled on the southern-west tip and up the western coast of Greenland.

    After the year 1200AD, the Earth’s and Greenland’s climate grew colder; ice started building up on the southern tip of Greenland. Before the end of 1300AD, the Viking settlements were just a memory. You can find the above by searching Google. One link is:


    The following quote you can also read about why there is global warming. This is from the book EINSTEIN’S UNIVERSE, Page 63, written by Nigel Calder in 1972, and updated in 1982.

    “The reckoning of planetary motions is a venerable science. Nowadays it tells us, for example, how gravity causes the ice to advance or retreat on the Earth during the ice ages. The gravity of the Moon and (to a lesser extent) of the Sun makes the Earth’s axis swivel around like a tilted spinning top. Other planets of the Solar System, especially Jupiter, Mars and Venus, influence the Earth’s tilt and the shape of its orbit, in a more-or-less cyclic fashion, with significant effects on the intensity of sunshine falling on different regions of the Earth during the various seasons. Every so often a fortunate attitude and orbit of the Earth combine to drench the ice sheets in sunshine as at the end of the most recent ice age, about ten thousand years ago. But now our relatively benign interglacial is coming to an end, as gravity continues to toy with our planet.”

    The above points out that the universe is too huge and the earth is too small for the earth’s population to have any effect on the earth’s temperature. The earth’s temperature is a function of the sun’s temperature and the effects from the many massive planets in the universe, i.e., “The gravity of the Moon and (to a lesser extent) of the Sun makes the Earth’s axis swivel around like a tilted spinning top. Other planets of the Solar System, especially Jupiter, Mars and Venus, influence the Earth’s tilt and the shape of its orbit, in a more-or-less cyclic fashion, with significant effects on the intensity of sunshine falling on different regions of the Earth during the various seasons.”

    Read below about carbon dioxide, which we need in order to exist. You can find the article below at:


    Of the 186 billion tons of carbon from CO2 that enter earth’s atmosphere each year from all sources, only 6 billion tons are from human activity. Approximately 90 billion tons come from biologic activity in earth’s oceans and another 90 billion tons from such sources as volcanoes and decaying land plants.

    At 380 parts per million CO2 is a minor constituent of earth’s atmosphere–less than 4/100ths of 1% of all gases present. Compared to former geologic times, earth’s current atmosphere is CO2- impoverished.

    CO2 is odorless, colorless, and tasteless. Plants absorb CO2 and emit oxygen as a waste product. Humans and animals breathe oxygen and emit CO2 as a waste product. Carbon dioxide is a nutrient, not a pollutant, and all life– plants and animals alike– benefit from more of it. All life on earth is carbon-based and CO2 is an essential ingredient. When plant-growers want to stimulate plant growth, they introduce more carbon dioxide.

    CO2 that goes into the atmosphere does not stay there, but continuously recycled by terrestrial plant life and earth’s oceans– the great retirement home for most terrestrial carbon dioxide.

    If we are in a global warming crisis today, even the most aggressive and costly proposals for limiting industrial carbon dioxide emissions and all other government proposals and taxes would have a negligible effect on global climate!

    The government is lying, trying to use global warming to limit, and tax its citizens through “cap and trade” and other tax schemes for the government’s benefit. We, the people cannot allow this to happen.

    A temperature graph normally goes here that shows the Earth’s Temperature from -2400 to guesses in +2400.

    If the Earth’s temperature graph is not shown above, you can see this temperature graph at the link:

  6. Please add me to your list, you must be familiar with the Streisand effect?

  7. Micky

    I feel ashamed that a scientist of his level can say that climate change is produced by the Sun and not by our daily activities.
    People like him can be very well paid by industry cartels to sustain such nonsense and it is sad that even in the scientific community, such individuals can find their place where usually we have only people truly interested in the good of the people and the environment.
    If they are not helping us in this matter, we can fight alone against climate change.
    Here are a few tips for 2015

  8. David

    I think it is very clear that people support the concept of AGW because of ignorance, or because it furthers some social goal such as a Marxist redistribution of wealth from wealthy societies to poor ones. Charlatans like Michael Moore and Al Gore (who builds mansions on the beach in Malibu while crying that the oceans will rise) can fool only the weak minded. Mr. Gore is now worth over $200 million dollars because of fools who buy into this fantasy. I applaud Mr. Fulks, and the many like him, for his honesty and diligence in exposing this scam. And no, I receive no compensation from the oil industry; I just fear for my country being destroyed by idiots.

  9. T Mahon, M.Div

    The term :”Denier” is not a term of science but is a term of religion. It refers to a heterodoxical belief system, or someone who rejects the orthodox view.

    • Tom Carlyle

      Right, like “holocaust denier,” which as all right-thinking, non-idiot persons (e.g. Hermann Goering, Jose Goebbels, Rudolph Hess, Martin Bormann, and other Nazis) truly know is a matter of race and religion, not historical and demonstrable fact. Hitler’s rocketry scientists opined that the Copernican scheme of geology and cosmology were poppycock and they instead conceived of an arrangement in which the earth’s surface was the concave interior of a hollow sphere whereby New York was somewhere overhead above Berlin. One wonders how the Manhattan Project with all its Jews beat the Master Race in developing the atomic bomb.

      Keep it up, all of you denier geniuses who are influenced only by empirical science and not at all by ideology and commercial convenience. Baton Rouge may yet be ocean front real estate. The Tin Hat Brigade is proud to call you all its own.

  10. Ruth Bendl

    As a Ctz. Astrophysicist, member of University Club, would you be interested in an Q&A at the Club?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: