11 ms·

Hawaii Extends Thirty Meter Telescope Permit Amid Protests

manicdee 7y ago
If you keep asking they might cave in and say yes?
Causality1 7y ago
Every source I've found just says "it's sacred in the Hawaiian religion" or "it's a sacred place" but always a vague answer. If you wanted to build on the site of the Wailing Wall or the Kaaba, the opposition would have a very specific list of ways those sites are sacred, with names and events. Additionally, less than 0.5% of Hawaiians practice the Hawaiian religion in question. Frankly I think this is a bunch of contrarians opposing the construction just to have something to feel self-righteous about.
- gomoboo 7y ago
  How do you know that the site being considered significant is tied solely to belief in Hawaiian cosmology? I don’t know much about Hawaiian culture but couldn’t it be the case that a wider proportion of the population considers the site significant for varying reasons? This article looks to imply just that: https://www.vox.com/identities/2019/7/24/20706930/mauna-kea-hawaii https://www.vox.com/identities/2019/7/24/20706930/mauna-kea-... “Inseparable from Hawaiian culture is a love of the land, ’āina. For Hawaiians — who thrived in the islands before foreigners arrived at the end of the 18th century — care and attachment to the land is central to their identities. The term “aloha ’āina,” literally meaning love of the land, has long been a rallying cry for Hawaiians.” I don’t have a horse in the race but feel there might be more to it than “...a bunch of contrarians opposing the construction just to have something to feel self-righteous about.”
  - TheOtherHobbes 7y ago
    It seems the point is no one knows if the site is genuinely significant or not. There's a claim it's significant, but the claim doesn't appear to be any more specific than "a demigod lives there". Obviously there's no way to make a rational impact study of the effect of a large telescope on a demigod. I don't think it's about self-righteousness, but it probably is about sovereignty. Some Hawaiians don't like outsiders coming in and building expensive things they won't personally get to use. It's never really about a demigod, because religion is mostly just politics rationalised (?) by appeals to the supernatural, and isn't really about anything supernatural at all.
  - CamperBob2 7y ago
    I don’t have a horse in the race but feel there might be more to it than “...a bunch of contrarians opposing the construction just to have something to feel self-righteous about. I wouldn't agree there. If you're a thinking human being, you have a horse in the race. Right now, a bunch of superstitious nitwits are swinging a hammer at its knees.
    - moate 7y ago
      Let's just say you are a member of a group of people who have been in a constant cultural conflict with another group of people. For hundreds of years they've inserted themselves into your homelands, force changes to the culture to fit their needs, and generally been entirely disinterested in actively engaging with you as a coequal resident of their space. Then, finally, you're able to find some ways to use their cultural system against them to get your needs met and your voice heard in your homeland. Some of this involves appeals to logic, but others involve appeals to emotion. To you, the ends justify the means. The stakes feel very high. Now imagine some dude on the internet refers to you as a nitwit without really have looked at the larger picture of what your political action within your homeland means within the larger context of your struggle to maintain your culture and be represented as a coequal member of your homeland. How do you think you'd respond to this dude on the internet?
      - roboys 7y ago
        Sounds like Osama Bin Laden, he was trying to get US military bases off of "sacred religious land" in Saudi Arabia. Primary reason for 9/11, he stated.
        moate 7y ago
        I don't know that "declaration of holy war and terrorist attacks" quite equal "social pressure from lawsuits and protesting" but it was all left vague so I guess that's a read?
      - CamperBob2 7y ago
        What does any of that have to do with building a telescope? Sounds more like an extortion scheme. If your culture doesn't contribute to the advancement of humanity, but rather actively stands in the way, then it needs to die.
- masklinn 7y ago
  >> always a vague answer. > Mauna a Wākea has long been a site of sacred cultural activity for Kānaka ʻŌiwi, at times serving as a burial ground. The sacredness of the Mauna is embedded in its Kānaka ʻŌiwi name, which reflects its connection to the sky: Wākea is the sky father in Kānaka ʻŌiwi cosmology. >> Frankly I think this is a bunch of contrarians opposing the construction just to have something to feel self-righteous about. > Beyond their patent offensiveness, such characterizations are as false as they are unhelpful. “Science and culture have long coexisted in Hawaiʻi,” Ecohydrologist Aurora Kagana-Viviani wrote in a recent Medium post, in which she traced the ways the scientific establishment all too often continues to ignore this evident fact. What have not always coexisted are scientific inquiry and fundamental respect for the people who come under science’s microscopes—or inhabit the realms of its telescopes. https://www.thenation.com/article/mauna-kea-tmt-colonial-science/ https://www.thenation.com/article/mauna-kea-tmt-colonial-sci...
- goodcanadian 7y ago
  It's a bit complicated; there are sacred sites all around the summit, but nothing on the summit, itself. The claim is that the summit was so sacred that they didn't even build temples there. My, admittedly cynical, take is that there is nothing on the summit because it is cold and barren and there isn't enough air to breathe. However, it is clear that Mauna Kea, in general, was an important place in Hawaiian religion and spirituality.
  - PopePompus 7y ago
    Ancient Hawaiians also constructed the largest primitive rock quarry in the world near the summit of Mauna Kea (https://www.nps.gov/places/mauna-kea-adz-quarry.htm https://www.nps.gov/places/mauna-kea-adz-quarry.htm), to mine dense rock for stone tools. So it's hard to believe that pre-contact Native Hawaiians believed that the summit of Mauna Kea was too sacred to build near (the TMT would be further below the summit than most of the existing telescopes [only the VLBA antenna would be lower]).
    - roboys 7y ago
      What percentage of a total community has to believe something is sacred before it is accepted as so? The idea of going with what the majority thinks falls apart in this context.
- gerbilly 7y ago
  That's the result of colonialism, which usually promotes forced assimilation into the colonizers culture. If you ask most natives in North America whey certain areas/things/animals are sacred, you might also get a 'vague,' answer because we have only recently stopped trying to systematically eliminate the native's culture and religion. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Indian_residential_school_system https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Indian_residential_sc...
- simplicio 7y ago
  I've always thought that if it was possible to not paint the telescopes white (and I realize it isn't), it would be a lot less of an issue. If they were painted brown they'd basically be invisible to most of the island. Instead, on a clear day, you can see them from almost anywhere on the Northern half of the island. The result is that if you're someone whose already angry about natives having lost control of the islands, foreign tourists, etc. then the fact that you also have these foreign looking domes looming over the highest point in the island perpetually at the corner of your field of view is likely to provide a constant low-level irritant. I suspect that, more than the somewhat tenuous claims of the summit having a history as a sacred site, are why the telescopes have become a focus for protest.
- SuoDuanDao 7y ago
  >Frankly I think this is a bunch of contrarians opposing the construction just to have something to feel self-righteous about. Even if it were, would that invalidate their right to say what gets built on their hill in a way genuine religious sentiment wouldn't? All I see is Scientists making Science look bad to the man on the street, again.
- bebop 7y ago
  Disclaimer: I am not a native Hawaiian, so this can be taken with a grain of salt. In the Hawaiian religious beliefs, the Mana (spiritual power) of a person does not end with their life. The Iwi (bones/remains) still contain the Mana of a person. In addition, traditionally the Ali'i (noble people) were held in high regard, and were often seen as holding a tremendous amount of Mana - which was their mandate to rule -. Mauna a Wakea (Muana Kea - named for Wakea (Sky Father), one of two primal deities), was a traditional burial site for Ali'i. So the sacredness of the mountain is derived from the fact that it is in close proximity to Wakea, and also importantly because the Mana of the Ali'i are believed to still be present. As a side note disturbing Ali'i remains is thought to be Kapu (forbidden for spiritual reasons, often with drastic punishment - traditionally -). So while to outsiders it may seem like "a bunch of contrarians" the story is much more nuanced. And trying to explain a full belief system in a news sound bite, I imagine would be difficult. As others have pointed out there is a long history of oppression and discrimination as well, so native Hawaiians have a reason to be agitated that their voice is not being respected. If anyone with more knowledge can correct/elaborate on the ideas above, I would appreciate that.
zxcb1 7y ago
Why is this better than launching a telescope into orbit?
- madaxe_again 7y ago
  Mass - cost-benefit still means ground based telescopes are the best option for most scenarios. The protests may change that equation. As much as I’m automatically inclined to side with science over mysticism, there are other telescopes being built right now (ELT, GMT) in the same class, both in Chile, where the mountains aren’t sacred, but just mountains. So - while they’re pushing on for now, it seems there’s as much dogma (we must have this telescope here) amongst scientists as their is amongst the spiritualists - yes, the top of Hawaii is a uniquely good spot for a telescope - within US borders - there are other spots just as good, however, but those would require international negotiation and cooperation rather than just domestic negotiation and cooperation. It all comes down to cost/benefit, and I think it’s getting marginal for the TMT. They’re going to need round the clock security, as the protests won’t stop once it’s built. It’s not too late to build it elsewhere - even in space. Launch costs have dropped dramatically since the TMT was conceived, and are continuing to do so. Assembly will then be the tricky part, as with JWST.
  - zxcb1 7y ago
    Thanks. So what kind of improvements do they expect with this one?
    - pas 7y ago
      It's planned as a general purpose observatory. Bigger mirror than any ever used would allow sharper, better images.
      - madaxe_again 7y ago
        The ELT will be complete five years before the TMT, and has a forty meter aperture.
Killes 7y ago
Maybe its the sacred lands sacred destiny to offer us a view into the cosmos, who has any better clue than any one else to guess divine intents of any kind ?
- rolltiide 7y ago
  This is the kind of logic I use on my astrology subscribed mates Women so surprised I’m not immediately ridiculing their belief system that they listen to my rationale on basically anything, as long as its tied to a sun, moon and rising sign. Your idea could work as long as you get a Hawaiian spiritual influencer to say it for you
  - King-Aaron 7y ago
    Why is it just women that are surprised?
    - rolltiide 7y ago
      Because I dont engage in this kind of smalltalk with men, and the ones I’m around don’t talk about astrology and don't subscribe to having an external locus of control Talking about an obscure astrological concept is a decent pickup line or opener, with women if you are interested in women and you’ll need to do a different study to figure out if men care. You’ll get a stronger reaction from people that are interested in astrology, and the ones that don't believe will laugh quizzically and not think more of it. In both circumstances you switch to deeper topics. In mixed company stick with being an astrology shaman because the one that is into it will have a stronger positive reaction, no use undermining that just to maintain consensus.
      - TheSpiceIsLife 7y ago
        Have you ever thought about what it is, exactly, you are doing here?
        turk73 7y ago
basicplus2 7y ago
It seems to me one of the best ways to protect a sacred site would be to put a serious telescope upon it. As it restricts access for a host of other activities for many miles around to keep light polution amd vibration to a minimum.
- ilikehurdles 7y ago
  Limiting discourse to only your way or the highway is disrespectful and precisely how these protections are ignored. This time it’s a telescope, next time it won’t be. Perhaps the community wants to protect their sacred site from building a telescope as well. Ignoring that because you believe your cause to be more valuable than their home isn’t justified. It’s as nonsensical as claiming that the best way to protect against pregnancy is to get pregnant, it’s just doublespeak. We could level a bunch of suburbia all over the country and put telescopes there, and that would both remove a blight on the American landscape while protecting another untouched one. But this isn’t what we discuss because “their” sacrifice is much easier for us to agree on than ours. Like it or not, it’s the same colonialist logic that led to the genocide of the American natives.
  - Allower 7y ago
    >same colonialist logic that led to the genocide of the American natives Guess I missed the part where the telescope commits genocide.. To have discourse both parties have to be capable of rational discussion. Raving about religious nonsense is a terrible argument. If there's a better one by all means lets discuss it. Frankly the argument against putting a telescope here amounts to little more than a tantrum from a toddler.
- sergioj97 7y ago
  Even though I think that wouldn't persuade the protesters, it's an interesting point to make.
hwlinsted 7y ago
The main problem here is one of incentive. Of course the researchers, university departments, contractors, etc want to build it. But who benefits? A very small number of people. All the locals get is: more traffic, more pollution, more waste, all of which are a direct result of the construction itself plus the increase in visitors. Plus, the locals feel this is imposing on their scared grounds. Again, without ANY benefit to them. I talked to one person at the protests, who said "The researchers don't want light pollution. We don't want telescope pollution."
- goodcanadian 7y ago
  Again, without ANY benefit to them. There is a large benefit to the locals in terms of jobs both during construction and after. Yes, the researchers are not local, but the engineers, technicians, maintenance staff, and so on usually are. Astronomy is the second largest contributor to the economy on the Big Island (after tourism).
  - PopePompus 7y ago
    It also significantly diversifies the economy. Tourism is cyclical. Astronomy research may have booms and busts too, but they are apt to be uncorrelated with the ups and downs of tourism.
    - mcgoooo 7y ago
      This is quite literally the best place to study stars in the whole world. Economically sure, not a lot of people may benefit, but scientific knowledge the whole world benefits
- underbluewaters 7y ago
  It could be a major source of pride. Having lived on Hawaii for a few years... there is not a lot going on. Tourism is by far the biggest employer and focus of development, with agriculture far behind. Hosting such an important scientific endeavor is a major achievement. I appreciate and empathize with the Hawaiians who see this project as a focal point of resisting so many offenses. It's also sad that such a great project (peering into the origins of the universe!) can't find a home there.
GlennS 7y ago
I visited Mauna Kea as a tourist some years ago. At the time, there were protesters present. They appeared to believe that they had been promised there would be a limit on how many telescopes were build, and that the astronomers had broken that promised by starting to build a limit+1th telescope without removing an existing one first. Anyone know if there's any truth to this?
- goodcanadian 7y ago
  I don't know for certain the specific case you are referring to, but it sounds like the Submillimetre Array (SMA). The issue was that SMA was being counted as one telescope (from a functional point of view, it is), but it has 8 antennas. I believe some telescopes have been removed to make way for TMT. The Caltech Submillimetre Observatory (CSO) for one.
- privong 7y ago
  Part of the TMT agreement (from 2015) involved removing some of the telescopes[0]. At least one telescope has been removed (the Caltech Submillimter Observatory, CSO) but aside from the CSO I'm not sure what the status is of other removals. The agreement was that: > three or four of the mountain’s 13 existing telescopes must be dismantled over the next decade. This implies the currently agreed upon limit is 10 or 11 telescopes (including the TMT). Unless the agreement has changed, I don't think the promise has been broken since the removal was over the 2015-2025 timescale. That being said, I'm unaware if there was a previous deal. There had been some controversy in the past regarding "outrigger" telescopes for the 10m Keck telescopes. These would have been used in combination with the 10m telescopes to do interferometry. It was argued that they were thus not "new" telescopes, but rather additions to the existing Keck telescopes. This was controversial and they were never built. [0] https://www.nature.com/news/hawaii-prunes-mauna-kea-telescope-hub-1.17688 https://www.nature.com/news/hawaii-prunes-mauna-kea-telescop...
  - goodcanadian 7y ago
    The outriggers did get approval. My understanding is that they were not built primarily for financial reasons.
bawana 7y ago
The interesting twist about building telescopes in Chile is that it gives the military industrial complex an excuse to build up to ‘protect’ them. Just like the Panama Canal, the Suez Canal the Hormuz strait and other internationally critical pieces of infrastructure. Sure people wont starve if a Chilean revolution takes over the telescopes and demands ‘taxes’, but the massive investment will protect itself.
reallydontask 7y ago
I think a lot of people in La Palma would be quite happy to have it built in the Roque de los Muchachos obvervatory [1] if Hawaii doesn't want it. The local papers are positively salivating at the prospect. [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roque_de_los_Muchachos_Observatory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roque_de_los_Muchachos_Observa...
kingkawn 7y ago
And if the construction location were the western wall? St Peters basilica? The Vietnam war memorial? Arlington National cemetery? A site of equivalent meaning to your worldview? What then?
- PopePompus 7y ago
  Well, I don't think the Native Hawaiians actually built Mauna Kea. I also suspect that the majority of Jews would not approve of building something atop the Western Wall, the majority of Catholics would not approve of building on St Peter's Basillica, but a 2018 poll conducted by the main Honolulu newspaper found 72% approval for building the TMT among Native Hawaiians ( https://tinyurl.com/y2qboalr https://tinyurl.com/y2qboalr )
  - kingkawn 7y ago
    I looked up the estimated Native Hawaiian population in Hawaii; 298,000 people. 28% of that is 83,440. A minority of 83,440 native people with shared history and spiritual beliefs are asking to have what is held dear to them treated in a way that does not feel like a violation. How small a group must they be to make ignoring their plea acceptable?
    - PopePompus 7y ago
      Well, if the other 72% of Native Hawaiians want to see it built on Mauna Kea, why do you dismiss their preferences? If just one person claimed to be offended, does that mean the project has to be stopped? The line has to be drawn somewhere, and 50% seems like a good choice.
- ceejayoz 7y ago
  Most of those locations don't take up 1/4 of a state, though.
  - kingkawn 7y ago
    Exceptions for one’s own beliefs and sense of reasonableness while denying others.

If you keep asking they might cave in and say yes?

Every source I've found just says "it's sacred in the Hawaiian religion" or "it's a sacred place" but always a vague answer. If you wanted to build on the site of the Wailing Wall or the Kaaba, the opposition would have a very specific list of ways those sites are sacred, with names and events. Additionally, less than 0.5% of Hawaiians practice the Hawaiian religion in question. Frankly I think this is a bunch of contrarians opposing the construction just to have something to feel self-righteous about.

gomoboo 7y ago
How do you know that the site being considered significant is tied solely to belief in Hawaiian cosmology? I don’t know much about Hawaiian culture but couldn’t it be the case that a wider proportion of the population considers the site significant for varying reasons? This article looks to imply just that: https://www.vox.com/identities/2019/7/24/20706930/mauna-kea-hawaii https://www.vox.com/identities/2019/7/24/20706930/mauna-kea-... “Inseparable from Hawaiian culture is a love of the land, ’āina. For Hawaiians — who thrived in the islands before foreigners arrived at the end of the 18th century — care and attachment to the land is central to their identities. The term “aloha ’āina,” literally meaning love of the land, has long been a rallying cry for Hawaiians.” I don’t have a horse in the race but feel there might be more to it than “...a bunch of contrarians opposing the construction just to have something to feel self-righteous about.”
- TheOtherHobbes 7y ago
  It seems the point is no one knows if the site is genuinely significant or not. There's a claim it's significant, but the claim doesn't appear to be any more specific than "a demigod lives there". Obviously there's no way to make a rational impact study of the effect of a large telescope on a demigod. I don't think it's about self-righteousness, but it probably is about sovereignty. Some Hawaiians don't like outsiders coming in and building expensive things they won't personally get to use. It's never really about a demigod, because religion is mostly just politics rationalised (?) by appeals to the supernatural, and isn't really about anything supernatural at all.
- CamperBob2 7y ago
  I don’t have a horse in the race but feel there might be more to it than “...a bunch of contrarians opposing the construction just to have something to feel self-righteous about. I wouldn't agree there. If you're a thinking human being, you have a horse in the race. Right now, a bunch of superstitious nitwits are swinging a hammer at its knees.
  - moate 7y ago
    Let's just say you are a member of a group of people who have been in a constant cultural conflict with another group of people. For hundreds of years they've inserted themselves into your homelands, force changes to the culture to fit their needs, and generally been entirely disinterested in actively engaging with you as a coequal resident of their space. Then, finally, you're able to find some ways to use their cultural system against them to get your needs met and your voice heard in your homeland. Some of this involves appeals to logic, but others involve appeals to emotion. To you, the ends justify the means. The stakes feel very high. Now imagine some dude on the internet refers to you as a nitwit without really have looked at the larger picture of what your political action within your homeland means within the larger context of your struggle to maintain your culture and be represented as a coequal member of your homeland. How do you think you'd respond to this dude on the internet?
    - roboys 7y ago
      Sounds like Osama Bin Laden, he was trying to get US military bases off of "sacred religious land" in Saudi Arabia. Primary reason for 9/11, he stated.
      - moate 7y ago
        I don't know that "declaration of holy war and terrorist attacks" quite equal "social pressure from lawsuits and protesting" but it was all left vague so I guess that's a read?
    - CamperBob2 7y ago
      What does any of that have to do with building a telescope? Sounds more like an extortion scheme. If your culture doesn't contribute to the advancement of humanity, but rather actively stands in the way, then it needs to die.
masklinn 7y ago
>> always a vague answer. > Mauna a Wākea has long been a site of sacred cultural activity for Kānaka ʻŌiwi, at times serving as a burial ground. The sacredness of the Mauna is embedded in its Kānaka ʻŌiwi name, which reflects its connection to the sky: Wākea is the sky father in Kānaka ʻŌiwi cosmology. >> Frankly I think this is a bunch of contrarians opposing the construction just to have something to feel self-righteous about. > Beyond their patent offensiveness, such characterizations are as false as they are unhelpful. “Science and culture have long coexisted in Hawaiʻi,” Ecohydrologist Aurora Kagana-Viviani wrote in a recent Medium post, in which she traced the ways the scientific establishment all too often continues to ignore this evident fact. What have not always coexisted are scientific inquiry and fundamental respect for the people who come under science’s microscopes—or inhabit the realms of its telescopes. https://www.thenation.com/article/mauna-kea-tmt-colonial-science/ https://www.thenation.com/article/mauna-kea-tmt-colonial-sci...
goodcanadian 7y ago
It's a bit complicated; there are sacred sites all around the summit, but nothing on the summit, itself. The claim is that the summit was so sacred that they didn't even build temples there. My, admittedly cynical, take is that there is nothing on the summit because it is cold and barren and there isn't enough air to breathe. However, it is clear that Mauna Kea, in general, was an important place in Hawaiian religion and spirituality.
- PopePompus 7y ago
  Ancient Hawaiians also constructed the largest primitive rock quarry in the world near the summit of Mauna Kea (https://www.nps.gov/places/mauna-kea-adz-quarry.htm https://www.nps.gov/places/mauna-kea-adz-quarry.htm), to mine dense rock for stone tools. So it's hard to believe that pre-contact Native Hawaiians believed that the summit of Mauna Kea was too sacred to build near (the TMT would be further below the summit than most of the existing telescopes [only the VLBA antenna would be lower]).
  - roboys 7y ago
    What percentage of a total community has to believe something is sacred before it is accepted as so? The idea of going with what the majority thinks falls apart in this context.
gerbilly 7y ago
That's the result of colonialism, which usually promotes forced assimilation into the colonizers culture. If you ask most natives in North America whey certain areas/things/animals are sacred, you might also get a 'vague,' answer because we have only recently stopped trying to systematically eliminate the native's culture and religion. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Indian_residential_school_system https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Indian_residential_sc...
simplicio 7y ago
I've always thought that if it was possible to not paint the telescopes white (and I realize it isn't), it would be a lot less of an issue. If they were painted brown they'd basically be invisible to most of the island. Instead, on a clear day, you can see them from almost anywhere on the Northern half of the island. The result is that if you're someone whose already angry about natives having lost control of the islands, foreign tourists, etc. then the fact that you also have these foreign looking domes looming over the highest point in the island perpetually at the corner of your field of view is likely to provide a constant low-level irritant. I suspect that, more than the somewhat tenuous claims of the summit having a history as a sacred site, are why the telescopes have become a focus for protest.
SuoDuanDao 7y ago
>Frankly I think this is a bunch of contrarians opposing the construction just to have something to feel self-righteous about. Even if it were, would that invalidate their right to say what gets built on their hill in a way genuine religious sentiment wouldn't? All I see is Scientists making Science look bad to the man on the street, again.
bebop 7y ago
Disclaimer: I am not a native Hawaiian, so this can be taken with a grain of salt. In the Hawaiian religious beliefs, the Mana (spiritual power) of a person does not end with their life. The Iwi (bones/remains) still contain the Mana of a person. In addition, traditionally the Ali'i (noble people) were held in high regard, and were often seen as holding a tremendous amount of Mana - which was their mandate to rule -. Mauna a Wakea (Muana Kea - named for Wakea (Sky Father), one of two primal deities), was a traditional burial site for Ali'i. So the sacredness of the mountain is derived from the fact that it is in close proximity to Wakea, and also importantly because the Mana of the Ali'i are believed to still be present. As a side note disturbing Ali'i remains is thought to be Kapu (forbidden for spiritual reasons, often with drastic punishment - traditionally -). So while to outsiders it may seem like "a bunch of contrarians" the story is much more nuanced. And trying to explain a full belief system in a news sound bite, I imagine would be difficult. As others have pointed out there is a long history of oppression and discrimination as well, so native Hawaiians have a reason to be agitated that their voice is not being respected. If anyone with more knowledge can correct/elaborate on the ideas above, I would appreciate that.

zxcb1 7y ago

Why is this better than launching a telescope into orbit?

madaxe_again 7y ago
Mass - cost-benefit still means ground based telescopes are the best option for most scenarios. The protests may change that equation. As much as I’m automatically inclined to side with science over mysticism, there are other telescopes being built right now (ELT, GMT) in the same class, both in Chile, where the mountains aren’t sacred, but just mountains. So - while they’re pushing on for now, it seems there’s as much dogma (we must have this telescope here) amongst scientists as their is amongst the spiritualists - yes, the top of Hawaii is a uniquely good spot for a telescope - within US borders - there are other spots just as good, however, but those would require international negotiation and cooperation rather than just domestic negotiation and cooperation. It all comes down to cost/benefit, and I think it’s getting marginal for the TMT. They’re going to need round the clock security, as the protests won’t stop once it’s built. It’s not too late to build it elsewhere - even in space. Launch costs have dropped dramatically since the TMT was conceived, and are continuing to do so. Assembly will then be the tricky part, as with JWST.
- zxcb1 7y ago
  Thanks. So what kind of improvements do they expect with this one?
  - pas 7y ago
    It's planned as a general purpose observatory. Bigger mirror than any ever used would allow sharper, better images.
    - madaxe_again 7y ago
      The ELT will be complete five years before the TMT, and has a forty meter aperture.

Killes 7y ago

Maybe its the sacred lands sacred destiny to offer us a view into the cosmos, who has any better clue than any one else to guess divine intents of any kind ?

rolltiide 7y ago
This is the kind of logic I use on my astrology subscribed mates Women so surprised I’m not immediately ridiculing their belief system that they listen to my rationale on basically anything, as long as its tied to a sun, moon and rising sign. Your idea could work as long as you get a Hawaiian spiritual influencer to say it for you
- King-Aaron 7y ago
  Why is it just women that are surprised?
  - rolltiide 7y ago
    Because I dont engage in this kind of smalltalk with men, and the ones I’m around don’t talk about astrology and don't subscribe to having an external locus of control Talking about an obscure astrological concept is a decent pickup line or opener, with women if you are interested in women and you’ll need to do a different study to figure out if men care. You’ll get a stronger reaction from people that are interested in astrology, and the ones that don't believe will laugh quizzically and not think more of it. In both circumstances you switch to deeper topics. In mixed company stick with being an astrology shaman because the one that is into it will have a stronger positive reaction, no use undermining that just to maintain consensus.
    - TheSpiceIsLife 7y ago
      Have you ever thought about what it is, exactly, you are doing here?
      - turk73 7y ago

basicplus2 7y ago

It seems to me one of the best ways to protect a sacred site would be to put a serious telescope upon it. As it restricts access for a host of other activities for many miles around to keep light polution amd vibration to a minimum.

ilikehurdles 7y ago
Limiting discourse to only your way or the highway is disrespectful and precisely how these protections are ignored. This time it’s a telescope, next time it won’t be. Perhaps the community wants to protect their sacred site from building a telescope as well. Ignoring that because you believe your cause to be more valuable than their home isn’t justified. It’s as nonsensical as claiming that the best way to protect against pregnancy is to get pregnant, it’s just doublespeak. We could level a bunch of suburbia all over the country and put telescopes there, and that would both remove a blight on the American landscape while protecting another untouched one. But this isn’t what we discuss because “their” sacrifice is much easier for us to agree on than ours. Like it or not, it’s the same colonialist logic that led to the genocide of the American natives.
- Allower 7y ago
  >same colonialist logic that led to the genocide of the American natives Guess I missed the part where the telescope commits genocide.. To have discourse both parties have to be capable of rational discussion. Raving about religious nonsense is a terrible argument. If there's a better one by all means lets discuss it. Frankly the argument against putting a telescope here amounts to little more than a tantrum from a toddler.
sergioj97 7y ago
Even though I think that wouldn't persuade the protesters, it's an interesting point to make.

hwlinsted 7y ago

The main problem here is one of incentive. Of course the researchers, university departments, contractors, etc want to build it. But who benefits? A very small number of people. All the locals get is: more traffic, more pollution, more waste, all of which are a direct result of the construction itself plus the increase in visitors. Plus, the locals feel this is imposing on their scared grounds. Again, without ANY benefit to them. I talked to one person at the protests, who said "The researchers don't want light pollution. We don't want telescope pollution."

goodcanadian 7y ago
Again, without ANY benefit to them. There is a large benefit to the locals in terms of jobs both during construction and after. Yes, the researchers are not local, but the engineers, technicians, maintenance staff, and so on usually are. Astronomy is the second largest contributor to the economy on the Big Island (after tourism).
- PopePompus 7y ago
  It also significantly diversifies the economy. Tourism is cyclical. Astronomy research may have booms and busts too, but they are apt to be uncorrelated with the ups and downs of tourism.
  - mcgoooo 7y ago
    This is quite literally the best place to study stars in the whole world. Economically sure, not a lot of people may benefit, but scientific knowledge the whole world benefits
underbluewaters 7y ago
It could be a major source of pride. Having lived on Hawaii for a few years... there is not a lot going on. Tourism is by far the biggest employer and focus of development, with agriculture far behind. Hosting such an important scientific endeavor is a major achievement. I appreciate and empathize with the Hawaiians who see this project as a focal point of resisting so many offenses. It's also sad that such a great project (peering into the origins of the universe!) can't find a home there.

GlennS 7y ago

I visited Mauna Kea as a tourist some years ago. At the time, there were protesters present. They appeared to believe that they had been promised there would be a limit on how many telescopes were build, and that the astronomers had broken that promised by starting to build a limit+1th telescope without removing an existing one first. Anyone know if there's any truth to this?

goodcanadian 7y ago
I don't know for certain the specific case you are referring to, but it sounds like the Submillimetre Array (SMA). The issue was that SMA was being counted as one telescope (from a functional point of view, it is), but it has 8 antennas. I believe some telescopes have been removed to make way for TMT. The Caltech Submillimetre Observatory (CSO) for one.
privong 7y ago
Part of the TMT agreement (from 2015) involved removing some of the telescopes[0]. At least one telescope has been removed (the Caltech Submillimter Observatory, CSO) but aside from the CSO I'm not sure what the status is of other removals. The agreement was that: > three or four of the mountain’s 13 existing telescopes must be dismantled over the next decade. This implies the currently agreed upon limit is 10 or 11 telescopes (including the TMT). Unless the agreement has changed, I don't think the promise has been broken since the removal was over the 2015-2025 timescale. That being said, I'm unaware if there was a previous deal. There had been some controversy in the past regarding "outrigger" telescopes for the 10m Keck telescopes. These would have been used in combination with the 10m telescopes to do interferometry. It was argued that they were thus not "new" telescopes, but rather additions to the existing Keck telescopes. This was controversial and they were never built. [0] https://www.nature.com/news/hawaii-prunes-mauna-kea-telescope-hub-1.17688 https://www.nature.com/news/hawaii-prunes-mauna-kea-telescop...
- goodcanadian 7y ago
  The outriggers did get approval. My understanding is that they were not built primarily for financial reasons.

bawana 7y ago

The interesting twist about building telescopes in Chile is that it gives the military industrial complex an excuse to build up to ‘protect’ them. Just like the Panama Canal, the Suez Canal the Hormuz strait and other internationally critical pieces of infrastructure. Sure people wont starve if a Chilean revolution takes over the telescopes and demands ‘taxes’, but the massive investment will protect itself.

reallydontask 7y ago

I think a lot of people in La Palma would be quite happy to have it built in the Roque de los Muchachos obvervatory [1] if Hawaii doesn't want it. The local papers are positively salivating at the prospect. [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roque_de_los_Muchachos_Observatory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roque_de_los_Muchachos_Observa...

kingkawn 7y ago

And if the construction location were the western wall? St Peters basilica? The Vietnam war memorial? Arlington National cemetery? A site of equivalent meaning to your worldview? What then?

PopePompus 7y ago
Well, I don't think the Native Hawaiians actually built Mauna Kea. I also suspect that the majority of Jews would not approve of building something atop the Western Wall, the majority of Catholics would not approve of building on St Peter's Basillica, but a 2018 poll conducted by the main Honolulu newspaper found 72% approval for building the TMT among Native Hawaiians ( https://tinyurl.com/y2qboalr https://tinyurl.com/y2qboalr )
- kingkawn 7y ago
  I looked up the estimated Native Hawaiian population in Hawaii; 298,000 people. 28% of that is 83,440. A minority of 83,440 native people with shared history and spiritual beliefs are asking to have what is held dear to them treated in a way that does not feel like a violation. How small a group must they be to make ignoring their plea acceptable?
  - PopePompus 7y ago
    Well, if the other 72% of Native Hawaiians want to see it built on Mauna Kea, why do you dismiss their preferences? If just one person claimed to be offended, does that mean the project has to be stopped? The line has to be drawn somewhere, and 50% seems like a good choice.
ceejayoz 7y ago
Most of those locations don't take up 1/4 of a state, though.
- kingkawn 7y ago
  Exceptions for one’s own beliefs and sense of reasonableness while denying others.