Yeah which is why I'm not on their side in the argument but apparently that makes me a white devil colonizer.
-
Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more
The Hawaii 30 Meter Telescope Controversy
- Thread starter JoeMorgue
- Start date
Yeah which is why I'm not on their side in the argument but apparently that makes me a white devil colonizer.
Belz...
Fiend God
You mean, now that they're a US state?
Yeah but that's white man belief, so it can be safely mocked.
Belz...
Fiend God
Humans never do anything half-measure, do they? They're either actual colonialists or they go full into white guilt. There's no in-between.
Look, I'm sorry people with my skin colour-ish took your land, and hopefully we won't do that anymore. No, I won't give you my house to compensate. No, I won't give you money, either. Get a job.
I don't think there is a simple answer as to who is right in this particular issue. Yes, I am repelled by people opposing science because of superstitious religious beliefs. But culture and cultural identity are real and crucial aspects of how people see themselves and give meaning to their lives. And the cultural importance of a location, a ritual, a style of dress, etc. to a person can be very real even when it is based on a belief in a non-existant God and a mythical creation story. I can fully understand and respect Hawaiians who see Mauna Kea as having extra special meaning to them, and accept that this special meaning needs to be acknowledged in decision making without seeing it as religion trumping science.
In my mind religion is irrelevant in this issue; it relates instead to the broader issue of recognizing the importance of someone's culture to them and trying to respect it, to work with it, whenever possible. Add to that the long history of mainland Americans destroying Hawaiian culture: pushing native Hawaiians from their land, imposed teaching of Christianity to their children by missionaries and belittling of their own culture, etc. I imagine one would become a bit touchy about anything that might resemble that today. And how it would feel if one's feelings and deep beliefs appeared to be meaningless and unimportant to those in government who supposedly were representing you?
That said, there are already many, many telescopes on this site (I've been there - very impressive). And I would very much like to see the 30 meter telescope built.
So what I hope for is a compromise. Frankly I think one should be possible because these compromises helped the other telescopes to be built.
In my mind religion is irrelevant in this issue; it relates instead to the broader issue of recognizing the importance of someone's culture to them and trying to respect it, to work with it, whenever possible. Add to that the long history of mainland Americans destroying Hawaiian culture: pushing native Hawaiians from their land, imposed teaching of Christianity to their children by missionaries and belittling of their own culture, etc. I imagine one would become a bit touchy about anything that might resemble that today. And how it would feel if one's feelings and deep beliefs appeared to be meaningless and unimportant to those in government who supposedly were representing you?
That said, there are already many, many telescopes on this site (I've been there - very impressive). And I would very much like to see the 30 meter telescope built.
So what I hope for is a compromise. Frankly I think one should be possible because these compromises helped the other telescopes to be built.
But that is exactly the basis of the existence of most countries and nations throughout the world. "People like me used to live here, as did their children, and their children's children...all the way until they got to me. And my children will own it when I am dead." In some cases, like Israel, there are long breaks in the middle part, yet Israelis nonetheless believe that they own the land they are on because "people like me used to live here."
So agree or not with the legitimacy of this concept, it appears to be the approach that underlies most of how people have assigned geography.
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
Then you won't mind your house being Kelo'ed to build a new particle accelerator lab. Although the science portions of the building will be adjacent, your land is just going to be where they put the cafeteria. Thursdays will be half-price bagel days! Plain only.
Gotcha fail. 2/10.
If there's an objective reason my house is the best place to build a new particle accelerator and there's already a dozen particle accelerators in my house oh and it's isn't "my house" it's just a random house in the neighborhood that I don't actually own but that my imaginary friend told me is "special and can't be touched because he says so" then use by all means take the house to build the accelerator no matter how much I complain.
Last edited:
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
Then we agree: feelings and motivations and purposes are irrelevant, what matters is property rights. Whoever owns the volcano gets to decide what to do on it. (Although if they plan to trigger an eruption they'd better keep it confined within their property line.)
As long as we're talking legal ownership and not some backdoor definition, then yes.
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
Heh heh heh "backdoor".
CORed
Penultimate Amazing
I heard somebody already defaced that beautiful mountain by carving it into statues of a bunch of dead politicians.
Belz...
Fiend God
As far as I'm concerned they should complete the damned statues, now that they started.
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
They can't. The remaining rock is unstable, if further carving were done it would trigger a collapse.
Here's a ten minute video that does a good job of addressing your concern:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mwMVSokHAJQ
The way you (and others) are framing the controversy is misleading. It's not about "science" being held back by "religion." No one is saying the telescope shouldn't be built because of their religion, they're just saying it shouldn't be built there, because it's a place that's culturally significant and has a history of being mismanaged. It's complex as hell, and I don't really think there's an easy answer as to who's "right."
Last edited:
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
The effectiveness of telescopes is directly related to their location. There's a reason the JWST will be located a million miles away from Earth, rather than in LEO, or on the ground. There's a reason Earth-based optical telescopes are placed on mountaintops. There's a reason why this telescope is to be placed here. That reason is science. Telling them to put the telescope somewhere else instead is literally holding back science.
ETA: And as far as "culturally significant" goes, these protestors are signalling that science is not culturally significant to them. There's a lot worse ways to mismanage a culturally significant mountaintop, than putting a telescope on it. For example: Not putting a telescope on it, every chance you get.
Last edited:
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
If it is that important to Science then I'm sure Science can pony up the funds to purchase the property.
Belz...
Fiend God
Really? I was under the impression that it was political.
(checks)
Huh, lack of funding, actually.
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
I'm open to an argument in favor of shifting scientific research into the private sector, but I really wasn't expecting you to take that position. So okay, sure. Go for it.
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
One of the faces was originally on the other end, but the rock there was bad and it collapsed. I forget which end/president it was, but he ended up on the other side.