Study: ExxonMobil accurately predicted warming since 1970s

Category: Science/Environment

Listening

Unlocking Word Meanings

Read the following words/expressions found in today’s article.

  1. remarkably / rɪˈmɑr kə bli / (adv.) – used to emphasize how unusual or unexpected something is
    Example:

    She didn’t study at all, but she did remarkably well in the exams.


  2. precision / prɪˈsɪʒ ən / (n.) – the characteristic of being accurate
    Example:

    The accountant needs to write his reports with precision.


  3. cast doubt / kæst daʊt / (idiom) – to make something seem not clear or not real
    Example:

    The new study is casting doubt on the old reports done by other scientists.


  4. astonishing / əˈstɒn ɪ ʃɪŋ / (adj.) – very surprising
    Example:

    The director didn’t expect an astonishing performance from the new actor.


  5. speculation / ˌspɛk yəˈleɪ ʃən / (n.) – an idea or a guess that has no clear basis
    Example:

    Rumors that the company is going bankrupt is pure speculation.


Article

Read the text below.

ExxonMobil’s scientists were remarkably accurate in their predictions about global warming, even as the company made public statements that contradicted its own scientists’ conclusions, a new study says.


The study in the journal Science looked at research that Exxon funded that didn’t just confirm what climate scientists were saying, but used more than a dozen different computer models that forecast the coming warming with precision equal to or better than government and academic scientists.


This was during the same time that the oil giant publicly doubted that warming was real and dismissed climate models’ accuracy. Exxon said its understanding of climate change evolved over the years and that critics are misunderstanding its earlier research.


Scientists, governments, activists and news sites, including Inside Climate News and the Los Angeles Times, several years ago reported that “Exxon knew” about the science of climate change since about 1977 all while publicly casting doubt. What the new study does is detail how accurate Exxon-funded research was. From 63% to 83% of those projections fit strict standards for accuracy and generally predicted correctly that the globe would warm about .36 degrees Fahrenheit (.2 degrees Celsius) a decade.


The Exxon-funded science was “actually astonishing” in its precision and accuracy, said study co-author Naomi Oreskes, a Harvard science history professor. But she added so was the “hypocrisy because so much of the ExxonMobil disinformation for so many years … was the claim that climate models weren’t reliable.”


Study lead author Geoffrey Supran, who started the work at Harvard and now is an environmental science professor at the University of Miami, said this is different than what was previously found in documents about the oil company.


The paper quoted then-Exxon CEO Lee Raymond in 1999 as saying future climate “projections are based on completely unproven climate models, or more often, sheer speculation,” while his successor in 2013 called models “not competent.”


Exxon’s understanding of climate science developed along with the broader scientific community, and its four decades of research in climate science resulted in more than 150 papers, including 50 peer-reviewed publications, said company spokesman Todd Spitler.


This article was provided by The Associated Press.


Viewpoint Discussion

Enjoy a discussion with your tutor.

Discussion A

  • According to the new study, the Exxon-funded research in the 1970s was accurate, but Exxon contradicted the results of its research. How do you think this new study will affect Exxon? Discuss.
  • Why do you think previous Exxon CEOs publicly doubted their funded research about future climate projections? Discuss.

Discussion B

  • According to Naomi Oreskes, “Much of the ExxonMobil disinformation for so many years … was the claim that climate models weren’t reliable.” Should the company be punished for spreading disinformation? Why or why not? Discuss.
  • Since the 1970s, we have been living in the Information Age. Why do you think disinformation is still a problem? Discuss.