From the latest copy of SCIENCE.

Our results show that in private and academic circles since the late 1970s and early 1980s, ExxonMobil predicted global warming correctly and skillfully.

Using established statistical techniques, we find that 63 to 83% of the climate projections reported by ExxonMobil scientists were accurate in predicting subsequent global warming.

ExxonMobil’s average projected warming was 0.20° ± 0.04°C per decade, which is, within uncertainty, the same as that of independent academic and government projections published between 1970 and 2007.

Moreover, we show that ExxonMobil scientists correctly dismissed the possibility of a coming ice age in favor of a “carbon dioxide induced ‘super-interglacial’”; accurately predicted that human-caused global warming would first be detectable in the year 2000 ± 5; and reasonably estimated how much CO2 would lead to dangerous warming.

Well…so what.

What is the significance of this claim?

WTF?

diver dan says "Well…so what. What is the significance of this claim?"

Well I can only conclude that you have no interest in the topic so then why bother to comment?

Or you have not bothered to follow any of the many threads on the topic in this forum or you have not bothered to follow what is arguably one of societies hottest discussed topics.

I'll join just a couple of the dots for you.

It is also stated in the article that " findings demonstrate that ExxonMobil didn’t just know “something” about global warming decades ago—they knew as much as academic and government scientists knew.

But whereas those scientists worked to communicate what they knew, ExxonMobil worked to deny it—including overemphasizing uncertainties, denigrating climate models, mythologizing global cooling, feigning ignorance about the discernibility of human-caused warming, and staying silent about the possibility of stranded fossil fuel assets in a carbon-constrained world."

The misinformation about anthological climate change has been pushed by the major players for 40 -50 years and this false narrative is accepted by many people.

This false narrative is pushed by some very regular commentators on this forum.

They seem to get upset when factual information is presented to them or just deny the information even exists.

WTF?

It should read "This misinformation about anthropological climate ...

Far more important than broadcasting something from a magazine is the ignorance of the founders of a new airline trying to show how 'Australian' they are by misspelling 'bonzer', and calling their firm Bonza.

You need to consider the prediction in context. One prediction made fifty years ago is selected out of how many predictions made? At the time it was made it was a stab in the dark. Nearly all five year predictions are rubbish, so why would a fifty year prediction carry any weight?

It is hard to make forecasts. For example, who would have thought that Mike and Andy's Sun Cable would flop? I thought it a rubbish idea, but that doesn't make me Nostradamus.