Saturday 29 November 2008

Cold snap fails to cool protagonists of global warming, Weekend Australian, 29 November, 2008.

I got more hate mail over this story than virtually anything I've ever written. Go figure. It was pretty straight reportage.
I got asked into  one of the senior editor's office and told to write this story; which as a loyal soldier I did.
They stayed well clear of the Science Writer, who would not comply.


Cold snap fails to cool protagonists of global warming

Stapleton, John. Weekend Australian [Canberra, A.C.T] 29 Nov 2008: 4.
Show highlighting
This week the CSIRO suggested the exact opposite. "The new study suggests that Southern Ocean currents, and therefore the Southern Ocean's ability to soak up carbon dioxide, have not changed in recent decades," it said. This time the story got no coverage in the SMH, and was run on the ABC's website as evidence the Southern Ocean was adapting to climate change.
ABC board member Keith Windschuttle said yesterday the national broadcaster was in breach of its charter to provide a diversity of views. "The ABC and the Fairfax press rarely provide an opportunity for global warming sceptics to put their view," Mr Windschuttle said. "The science is not settled.
EUROPE is shivering through an extreme cold snap. One of the coldest winters in the US in more than 100 years is toppling meteorological records by thedozen, and the Arctic ice is expanding. Even Australia has been experiencing unseasonable snow.
But the stories about global warming have not stopped, not for a second.
In May last year, The Sydney Morning Herald breathlessly reported that climate change had reduced the Southern Ocean's ability to soak up carbon dioxide, claiming that as a result global warming would accelerate even faster than previously thought.
The story was picked up and repeated in a number of different journals around the region.
But this week the CSIRO suggested the exact opposite. "The new study suggests that Southern Ocean currents, and therefore the Southern Ocean's ability to soak up carbon dioxide, have not changed in recent decades," it said. This time the story got no coverage in the SMH, and was run on the ABC's website as evidence the Southern Ocean was adapting to climate change.
CSIRO oceanographer Stuart Rintoul, a co-author of the study, said it did not disprove global warming and he did not believe its lack of an alarmist tone was responsible for the poor coverage.
But the story is being pointed out as an example of media bias on global warming. Critics argue that the ABC and the Fairfax media are the worst offenders.
ABC board member Keith Windschuttle said yesterday the national broadcaster was in breach of its charter to provide a diversity of views. "The ABC and the Fairfax press rarely provide an opportunity for global warming sceptics to put their view," Mr Windschuttle said. "The science is not settled.
"We are seeing an increasing number of people with impeccable scientific backgrounds questioning part or whole of the story. I don't believe the ABC has been reflecting the genuine diversity of the debate. Under its own act, the ABC is required to produce a diversity of views."
Bob Carter of James Cook University, one of the world's best-known climate change sceptics, said there was no doubt Windschuttle was correct.
"With very few exceptions, press reporters commenting on global warming are either ignorant of the science matters involved, or wilfully determined to propagate warming hysteria because that fits their personal world view, or are under editorial direction to focus the story around the alarmist headline grab -- and often all three," Professor Carter said.
National Climate Centre former head William Kininmonth said coverage of global warming had been hysterical and was getting worse, with a large public relations effort inundating the media with information from the alarmist side.
______________________________
>> Editorial -- Page 16
Credit: John Stapleton
Posted by at No comments:

Friday 28 November 2008

Australian actor's terrifying ordeal - Mumbai Massacre, The Australian, 28 November, 2008

Australian actor's terrifying ordeal - MUMBAI MASSACRE

Stapleton, John. The Australian [Canberra, A.C.T] 28 Nov 2008: 3.
Show highlighting
[Brooke Satchwell] said guests locked themselves in toilet cubicles as "people were being shot in the hallways", but then they began looking for somewhere safer.
"I found out they were targeting foreigners and ringing up to people's rooms and asking staff to hand over passports and asking British and American citizens to come downstairs. Obviously that was quite a concern." Among those travelling with Satchwell was her boyfriend, David Gross, son of Sydney QC Bernard Gross.
He told a reporter: "I can't even get my leg dressed; we can't go to the airport -- that's been bombed. We can't go to the police centres -- they've been bombed.

AUSTRALIAN actor Brooke Satchwell, best known for her role in Neighbours, hid inside a cupboard on the ground floor of the Taj Mahal Hotel for an hour as gunshots rang out around her.
She described the experience as "terrifying", saying she could hear people being shot in the hotel corridors and had fled past dead bodies in the lobby as she left the hotel.
Satchwell, 28, had just arrived in Mumbai to begin a three-week shoot and was having her first production meeting with fellow crew members.
"I slipped downstairs to have a smoke and stopped at the bathroom on the ground floor on the way back in," she told radio personality Neil Mitchell in Melbourne.
"As I stepped into the bathroom you could hear gunfire start up in the lobby; everyone just froze."
Satchwell said guests locked themselves in toilet cubicles as "people were being shot in the hallways", but then they began looking for somewhere safer.
"The staff let us hide in a service cupboard. We sat in there listening to machinegun fire."
She said two of the male staff were sticking their heads out to see what was going on.
"They were reporting that there was a dead body outside the bathroom and they were seeing people being shot in the hallways. There was a lot of confusion; we all felt like sitting ducks."
Satchwell said after about an hour security staff led her and others out through the hotel lobby, past dead bodies and into the street.
But she quickly realised the streets were not safe, especially for tourists.
"It became very clear that being out and about was not very safe and foreigners were a strong target."
She said she had stayed in contact with the rest of the film crew via SMS.
She said "the guys" were under the false impression that the police and army were already in control, but she could see that was notthe case.
"I found out they were targeting foreigners and ringing up to people's rooms and asking staff to hand over passports and asking British and American citizens to come downstairs. Obviously that was quite a concern." Among those travelling with Satchwell was her boyfriend, David Gross, son of Sydney QC Bernard Gross.
Mr Gross reportedly cut his leg fleeing from the famous Cafe Leopold.
He said he had been uncertain where to flee to during the harrowing experience.
He told a reporter: "I can't even get my leg dressed; we can't go to the airport -- that's been bombed. We can't go to the police centres -- they've been bombed.
Satchwell's agent, Nathan Morris, said Satchwell was now keeping a low profile and trying to get advice from DFAT on how to get home.
"I believe it is still very tense up there," he said.
Satchwell stars in the upcoming Australian film Subdivision.
She described the attack as "vicious, senseless".
"I feel sorry for the Indian people," she said.
She said that as she left the hotel she saw dead bodies with blood-soaked shirts lying on the ground. "I ran as quickly as I could," she said.
At the same time, her boyfriend was trapped on the first floor of the hotel. He told the Nine Network how he had to smash a window of the historic hotel and wrapped curtain drapes together to form a rope to escape.
The group Satchwell was travelling with included Anthony Rose, a Sydney television director, as well as photographers, camera operators and other staff.
Credit: John Stapleton
Posted by at No comments:

Friday 21 November 2008

Woolgrowers relieved mulesing deadline put off, The Australian, 21 November, 2008.

Woolgrowers relieved mulesing deadline put off

Stapleton, John. The Australian [Canberra, A.C.T] 21 Nov 2008: 2.
Show highlighting
Woolgrower Neville Swain, from near Gunnedah in NSW, said it would be difficult to phase out mulesing by 2010. "I was very surprised when I heard they had set the deadline in the first place," he said. "They must have been under extreme pressure."
Wool Producers Australia president Don Hamblin said many of the problems derived from the 2010 deadline being set without realistic alternatives to mulesing being in place. "It was a very tight deadline," he said. "The commitment to a specific date has upset woolgrowers and caused a lot of angst."
President of NSW Farmers Jock Laurie said problems had arisen because promises to phase out mulesing had been made on thebasis of faith that research would develop alternatives within the timeframe. "I've been mulesing for years -- if there was an alternative, I wouldn't be doing it. But it has to be an alternative that is affordable."
WOOLGROWERS struggling to meet the 2010 deadline to phase out mulesing have reacted with relief to the industry decision to back away from the timetable.
The shift came after this week's takeover of the board of research and development body Australian Wool Innovation by growers opposed to the deadline.
But animal rights activists are claiming that if the 2010 deadline, originally set by the industry in 2004, is not met, international calls to boycott Australian wool will increase. Mulesing, which involves the removal of skin folds from the rear of sheep to prevent fly strike, has been portrayed as cruel by animal rights activists, particularly the international group People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals.
Newly elected chairman of Australian Wool Innovation Wal Merriman said yesterday the 2010 deadline might exist in many people's minds, but farmers had no intention of letting their sheep die from fly strike. He said alternatives, including the use of clips, intradermal chemicals, pain killers and breeding, were all being pursued but at this point none was viable. He said an estimated three million sheep a year would die without mulesing.
"The original deadline was based on the fact AWI believed they had viable alternatives, but these didn't eventuate," he said.
"Nobody likes mulesing, but the alternative is letting millions of sheep die a slow and painful death, and nobody wants that."
Suzanne Cass of the Live Export Shame group said mulesing was not a surgical treatment but a mutilation carried out without anaesthetic. "AWI is not doing itself any favours by ignoring animal advocates and thinking we will go away. We won't."
Fashion leaders including Abercrombie & Fitch, H&M, Victoria's Secret and Liz Claiborne, along with retailers AB Lindex, with 346 stores in northern Europe, and RNB Retail and Brands, with 450 stores in 12 countries, have pressured Australian graziers to stop mulesing.
But woolgrower Neville Swain, from near Gunnedah in NSW, said it would be difficult to phase out mulesing by 2010. "I was very surprised when I heard they had set the deadline in the first place," he said. "They must have been under extreme pressure."
He said the alternatives were not yet practical. Like many woolgrowers, he believes the original anti-mulesing push was stirred up by "a mob of radicals who have been very clever in convincing our customers they shouldn't buy our product".
Wool Producers Australia president Don Hamblin said many of the problems derived from the 2010 deadline being set without realistic alternatives to mulesing being in place. "It was a very tight deadline," he said. "The commitment to a specific date has upset woolgrowers and caused a lot of angst."
President of NSW Farmers Jock Laurie said problems had arisen because promises to phase out mulesing had been made on thebasis of faith that research would develop alternatives within the timeframe. "I've been mulesing for years -- if there was an alternative, I wouldn't be doing it. But it has to be an alternative that is affordable."
Editorial -- Page 13
Credit: John Stapleton
Posted by at No comments:

Saturday 15 November 2008

DNA test ban plan courts rebellion, Weekend Australian, 15 November, 2008.

DNA test ban plan courts rebellion

Stapleton, John. Weekend Australian [Canberra, A.C.T] 15 Nov 2008: 6.
Show highlighting
"I was shattered, completely shattered," he said. "I had no suspicion, none at all.
So concerned did the Government become this week over the furore created by the release of a discussion paper on laws governing DNA theft, Home Affairs Minister Bob Debus issued a statement claiming it was never the intention to jail fathers for conducting "legitimate" paternity tests.
"Even if the legislation is passed people will find the information they want," he said. "A lot of offshore laboratories actively promote their services in Australia via the internet. The legislation will be powerless to stop these providers offering their services toAustralian fathers."
PHILLIP Miegel knows better than most people the devastating impacts of being lied to about paternity.
He became suspicious after his wife fell pregnant with their fourth child, despite his having had a vasectomy.
In the following months, he discovered he was not the biological father of three of the four children he had been raising as his own.
Legislation being proposed by the Rudd Government, which could see fathers like Mr Miegel -- who DNA test their children without a court order -- being jailed for two years has caused a community outcry.
A spokesman for one of the country's leading genetic laboratories claimed yesterday the laws would lead to civil disobedience as parents went overseas for the tests.
The number of tests being conducted annually has doubled in the past six years to 6000, with more than 1200 fathers a year finding they are not the biological parent.
The proposed legislation has sparked claims the Family Court refuses as many as 90 per cent of applications for DNA tests.
With the issue of thousands or even tens of thousands of fathers paying child support for children who are not theirs a burning one in fathers groups, Mr Miegel finds himself among those calling for DNA testing to be made mandatory at birth.
The 40-year-old labourer, from Gunnedah in northern NSW, said everyone involved in his case, particularly the children's "grandparents", had been devastated by the findings.
His biological son now lives with him full time but he has, despite his wishes, no contact with the other children.
"I was shattered, completely shattered," he said. "I had no suspicion, none at all.
"It affects everyone. My parents were completely devastated. My youngest was a girl, the first in the family for a long time, and my father, who thought he was her grandfather, took it really hard."
So concerned did the Government become this week over the furore created by the release of a discussion paper on laws governing DNA theft, Home Affairs Minister Bob Debus issued a statement claiming it was never the intention to jail fathers for conducting "legitimate" paternity tests.
"What we're attempting to legislate is the misuse of the results of paternity tests, which can cause great embarrassment and hurt," he said.
However the proposed legislation states unambiguously a person who "obtains any bodily material of another person with theintention of causing a genetic test to be conducted" could face two years imprisonment. There is no exemption for fathers. A spokeswoman for Mr Debus said he was on a plane and unavailable to be interviewed.
Ian Smith, business development manager for Genetic Technologies, which conducts more than half the DNA paternity tests in Australia, said the proposed legislation would encourage civil disobedience.
"Even if the legislation is passed people will find the information they want," he said. "A lot of offshore laboratories actively promote their services in Australia via the internet. The legislation will be powerless to stop these providers offering their services toAustralian fathers."
The Family Court did not collect data on the number of applications for DNA tests and it would take months to determine what percentage were rejected, a spokeswoman said.
Credit: John Stapleton
Posted by at No comments:

Friday 14 November 2008

Furious dads not only ones wanting tests, The Australian, 14 November, 2008.

I did not agree with the anti-male anti-father bias in this story. It was out of my control.


Furious dads not only ones wanting tests

Dayton, Leigh. John Stapleton The Australian [Canberra, A.C.T] 14 Nov 2008: 5.
"For me, DNA testing has been a very positive thing," Mr [James Fitzclarence] said. "I have another little girl now from another relationship and she has a sister. They all love each other dearly and get on very well."
"He refused to acknowledge he was the father," said Ms James, who has since married. "He would not pay for or take a (paternity) test."
"These situations often arise in very volatile relationships that have already broken up," she said. "There is already unhappiness and no longer a relationship between the partners."

Full Text

ANGRY fathers wanting to shirk financial responsibility are not the only group of people going to court over paternity issues.
In an analysis of legal cases in which people intentionally seek a genetic test, US researcher Gregory Kaebnick found that women seeking testing to impose paternal responsibilities were also highly represented.
Dr Kaebnick -- from the Hastings Center in Garrison, New York -- also found two other categories: women attempting to deny paternity rights, and men seeking to obtain them.
Lyn Turney, a sociologist at Swinburne University of Technology in Melbourne who has studied the experiences of people involved in paternity tests, said that Dr Kaebnick's categories also applied in Australia, although people had many motivations for wanting DNA paternity tests.
"I think most fathers (who seek testing) have a genuine desire to be the father of the child," Dr Turney said.
James Fitzclarence would certainly agree. His relationship with his child's mother broke up shortly after she became pregnant. From previous experience, Mr Fitzclarence had come to believe he could not have children and this was the child he had always wanted.
Despite his wishes to be involved, the child was born without him even knowing. He hired a solicitor and with the co-operation of the mother, who had previously declared she was not certain he was the father, he paid for genetic tests.
They proved he was the father of his daughter Katya, now four years old. Eventually, he was able to establish a close relationship with her.
"For me, DNA testing has been a very positive thing," Mr Fitzclarence said. "I have another little girl now from another relationship and she has a sister. They all love each other dearly and get on very well."
"Joan James" -- who chose not to use her real name, to protect her now six-year-old son -- had a very different experience. After a short relationship she became pregnant and the father disappeared.
"He refused to acknowledge he was the father," said Ms James, who has since married. "He would not pay for or take a (paternity) test."
She claimed it took nine months of stressful legal action to obtain a court order demanding the man take the test. Despite a positive test he has continued to deny any association with the child, even refusing to sign documents needed for Ms James to acquire a passport for her son.
According to Dr Turney, emotions surrounding disputed paternity are often intensified by the marketing of paternity tests by private firms and the vocal concerns of fathers' rights groups.
"These situations often arise in very volatile relationships that have already broken up," she said. "There is already unhappiness and no longer a relationship between the partners."
The external push for "peace of mind" tests can be the final end to a less traumatic end to an already damaged relationship.
This week's release of a discussion paper for public consultation about new laws covering DNA theft has fuelled the emotions of people involved in paternity disputes. The proposed laws would make it unlawful to obtain a sample of someone's DNA for testing without permission.
Not everyone in a dispute disagrees with the premise of consent. Mr Fitzclarence sought permission from his child's mother and even Ms James backs the proposed law.
"It's really, really important that there is regulation to ensure genetic testing is used responsibly," she said.
Credit: Leigh Dayton, John Stapleton
Posted by at No comments:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)