Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Giant Telescope Project Stalled By Hawaiian Natives (khon2.com)

Posted by samzenpus on from the go-ahead-and-stop dept.

Fudge Factor 3000 writes: The Hawaiian Supreme Court has pulled a construction permit for the Thirty Meter Telescope project. A vocal minority of Hawaiians has vehemently protested the construction of the telescope for religious reasons. Now, they have been successful in contesting the construction permit. The ruling reads in part: "The process followed by the Board here did not meet these standards. Quite simply, the Board put the cart before the horse when it issued the permit before the request for a contested case hearing was resolved and the hearing was held. Accordingly, the permit cannot stand."

115 of 177 comments (clear)

  1. I support the telescope by Crashmarik · · Score: 4, Insightful

    But the hypocrisy that will come from the complaints about the "Vocal Minority" will be over the top. All I have to say to both sides on this is, "Welcome to the rule of law and individual rights"

    1. Re:I support the telescope by pushing-robot · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Section 7. The State reaffirms and shall protect all rights, customarily and traditionally exercised for subsistence, cultural and religious purposes and possessed by ahupua’a tenants who are descendants of native Hawaiians who inhabited the Hawaiian Islands prior to 1778, subject to the right of the State to regulate such rights. [Add Const Con 1978 and election Nov 7, 1978]”

      It may be law, but it makes me uneasy when a religion becomes enshrined in law. I guess we're lucky they're not cannibals.

      --
      How can I believe you when you tell me what I don't want to hear?
    2. Re:I support the telescope by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If Maunakea is so sacred, why has the military been able to use it as a bombing range all these years? Could it be that astronomers are just more easily picked on than soldiers?

    3. Re:I support the telescope by hackertourist · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This ruling has nothing to do with religion. Due process was not followed when the permit was granted. The university is free to apply for a permit again.

    4. Re:I support the telescope by pushing-robot · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      Well, they wouldn't be the first religious people to prefer bombs over science,

      --
      How can I believe you when you tell me what I don't want to hear?
    5. Re:I support the telescope by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The legal text quoted says that the religion is subject to the state's rights. This is pretty much the opposite of enshrining religion in state law.

    6. Re:I support the telescope by NotDrWho · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Anyone who has ever worked with Hawaiian natives can tell you this has nothing to do with religion and everything to do with money. Basically, whoever is trying to build this telescope must not have realized that building anything big in Hawaii requires a big kickback to the natives.

      --
      SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
    7. Re:I support the telescope by pla · · Score: 3, Interesting

      This ruling has nothing to do with religion.

      "The State reaffirms and shall protect all rights, customarily and traditionally exercised for subsistence, cultural and religious purposes"

      Well, if by "nothing" you mean "everything"...


      Due process was not followed when the permit was granted. The university is free to apply for a permit again.

      Does the state intend to reimburse the university for expenses already incurred as a result of the state's negligence in failing to follow their discriminatory religion-favoring "due process" rules?

    8. Re:I support the telescope by chubs · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Pesky natives. I can't believe that after coercing them the U.S., transforming their homeland into an amusement park for tourists and virtually enslaving their people in the sugar plantations, they STILL feel like they have to be consulted before things happen on what little ground they have left. Didn't they get the message that they aren't valued? To think they want OUR MONEY when all we are trying to do is take over everything their culture remembers is preposterous. Honestly, we've been more than kind to them. They should look to the mainland and feel lucky we didn't treat them like we did the natives here.

    9. Re:I support the telescope by pushing-robot · · Score: 1

      Most organized anything, religion included, is ultimately about money. I'm just not comfortable with government granting special privilege to people based on their affiliation, as the duty of the state should be to ensure fair access to public lands, not to let some minority of citizens extort the rest.

      Aside: Is there any example of 'ancestral claims to land' not ending in a giant mess?

      --
      How can I believe you when you tell me what I don't want to hear?
    10. Re:I support the telescope by hackertourist · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It doesn't matter on which grounds the protest group objected to the permit. They were not heard, and that's what the Court ruled on.

    11. Re:I support the telescope by jmac_the_man · · Score: 1
      That's... protection from the government demanding that Native Hawaiians change their culture. The government of Hawaii shouldn't be demanding that ANYONE change their culture. (In fact, the US Constitution does extend that protection to everyone. The Hawaiian one probably does too, in parts of it that aren't quoted.)

      The point of a Constitution is that it's a set of rules that restrict the government from taking action against the citizenry. It makes me uneasy when someone advocates for loosening those restrictions.

    12. Re:I support the telescope by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I spent a month in Hawaii learning about the native culture. The people are nice enough but as for the culture: I can hardly blame the plantation owners for considering them pagan savages. There is nothing of value to preserve there.

      It's an unpopular thing to say but the Hawaiins are infinitely better off as a result of gentrification than they were while they were still killing each-other for offending their royalty.

    13. Re:I support the telescope by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 1

      Dam, that was beautiful sarcasm. Mod +1.

      It is gems like this that prove /. isn't completely crap these days.

    14. Re: I support the telescope by cyberchondriac · · Score: 1, Interesting

      It's probably no less valid though than mindlessly subscribing to the romantic "noble savage" narrative. That feel good frivolity belongs back in the 19th century where is was born, not the 21st century, when historical and archaeological evidence says otherwise.
      That said, I don't think his "pagan savages" remark was called for. Civilization doesn't really reduce cruelty all that much, it just hides it much better.

      --

      Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
    15. Re:I support the telescope by Solandri · · Score: 4, Informative

      To be fair, Hawaii is a particularly brazen example of a territory grab. I mean sure, most of the U.S. was settled that way, taking territory from native Americans (who didn't have the concept of owning land). But Hawaii was originally a country. White settlers from the U.S. who wanted to use it for agriculture overthrew the native government, and got the U.S. to annex it. Even then it wasn't over, as the U.S. allows territories to vote for either independence or statehood (the Philippines and Cuba for example voted for independence, Puerto Rico is in a perpetual state of delaying the vote). But by the time Hawaii voted, its native population had been overwhelmed by sugar and pineapple plantation workers and military personnel at Pearl Harbor.

      From the perspective of the natives, a mere kickback is probably a tiny fraction of what they feel is owed to them for basically stealing their country.

    16. Re:I support the telescope by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      If you wanted to return them you should have done it within 30 days.

      Signed,
          Britain.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    17. Re:I support the telescope by Copid · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Could it be that astronomers are just more easily picked on than soldiers?

      I think you're on the right track, but the phrasing is backward. People with guns an pick on whomever they want. People with telescopes have to ask permission.

      --
      An interesting anagram of "BANACH TARSKI" is "BANACH TARSKI BANACH TARSKI"
    18. Re:I support the telescope by spire3661 · · Score: 2

      People who are not alive should not be granted stuff like this. No law should cover 'descendants' The law is for the LIVING.

      --
      Good-bye
    19. Re:I support the telescope by spire3661 · · Score: 2

      Hawaii is AMERICAN soil, not native Hawaiian soil. Every American alive has just as much claim to Hawaii as any 'native'. Its not 'their' culture anymore, its 'ours'. You know, melting pot and all that.

      --
      Good-bye
    20. Re:I support the telescope by spire3661 · · Score: 2

      Praise ATOM!

      --
      Good-bye
    21. Re: I support the telescope by ceoyoyo · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Jared Diamond calls it something like the noble savage fantasy. Many people insist on believing that native cultures were all peaceful utopias who called up mother Earth every Sunday. The truth is that premodern cultures, including white European cultures, were almost all incredibly nasty. Occasional, isolated, exceptions existed, until they met their bloodthirsty enslaving, often cannibalistic neighbours. Those neighbours were sometimes English, Spanish, Carib, Iroquois, Viking, Ottoman, or pretty much anybody else. Modern societies aren't perfect, but they're far, far better than anything that existed even a couple hundred years ago.

    22. Re: I support the telescope by thinkwaitfast · · Score: 1

      Civilization is subjective. Not all civilizations are western.

    23. Re: I support the telescope by Lodlaiden · · Score: 1

      It must have something to do with the Westernized schooling process.

      --
      Suborbital [spaceflight] is the special olympics of spaceflight. - Rei
    24. Re:I support the telescope by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 2

      They were not heard, and that's what the Court ruled on.

      The real problem is that they were not paid off. Some native groups were paid off to abstain from protesting, but not all of them. UHH should have invested more time and money upfront to keep the right people happy. Now they are going to have to deal with bruised egos, and it is going to cost them even more.

    25. Re:I support the telescope by Lodlaiden · · Score: 1

      I know you were trying to be funny, but I just went through this mental scenario, which suddenly makes the biblical explanation seem a lot more feasible. The Bible was explaining fission and/or cloning, How else would you explain something that complex other than taking a visible/tangible part of something, such as a neutron (rib), proton (rib), or electron (looks like a rib), from the common drawing), from an atom and using it to create something else of similar value.

      --
      Suborbital [spaceflight] is the special olympics of spaceflight. - Rei
    26. Re:I support the telescope by ultranova · · Score: 1

      Hawaii is AMERICAN soil, not native Hawaiian soil. Every American alive has just as much claim to Hawaii as any 'native'. Its not 'their' culture anymore, its 'ours'. You know, melting pot and all that.

      "Melting pot" refers to the idea that people come and bring their cultural heritage to form something new. Claiming someone else's land for yourself is conquest, not melting pot. Stop smearing a good idea just to defend an obsolete one.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    27. Re: I support the telescope by cyberchondriac · · Score: 2

      Who said they were all western.. I agree there are certainly different levels of civilization to the point where some others might not consider them civilizations, there's no clear delineation. That's why I disagree with the term "pagan savages", not to mention the obvious religious connotation. Being pagan doesn't make one a savage. But at the same time, there is no "noble savage", not the Zulus, Maori, Navajo or Apache..etc... they all practiced their own cruelty and abuses. It never really changed. All through history, even as civilizations grew more complex: Mayan, Aztec, Babylonian, Persian, Greek, Roman, Ottoman, Mongol, Viking, as well as pretty much all of Europe in the middle ages, China, and Japan (Feudal period).. there was no shortage of ignoble and inhuman, selfish acts. People have always abused other people.

      --

      Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
    28. Re:I support the telescope by tsqr · · Score: 2

      White settlers from the U.S. who wanted to use it for agriculture overthrew the native government [wikipedia.org], and got the U.S. to annex it.

      Yes they did. And a thousand years before that, settlers from Tahiti conquered the descendants of the previous settlers from the Southern Marquesas.

    29. Re: I support the telescope by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I have noted this when I hear people talk about Native Americans as if they were the right hand of mother nature herself. The natives where I grew up were alcoholic poachers that would shoot wild game out there simply for the sport, knowing that since they had native rights they could get away with it.

    30. Re:I support the telescope by Crashmarik · · Score: 1

      I understand, but believe it or not small groups of people being able to gum up the works is a design feature of our system not a bug. The reverse is generally considered undesirable, think of the term "getting railroaded" or Andrew Jackson's forced removal of Indian populations.

    31. Re:I support the telescope by Crashmarik · · Score: 1

      Praise Bomb

      http://www.ew.com/sites/defaul...

    32. Re:I support the telescope by RightwingNutjob · · Score: 1

      Obsolete how? If you think that there's anything other than the threat of physical violence that keeps the good intentions and first world problems we've got here in the West from collapsing, you're smoking something. And if you honestly think that the tribal savages in the rest of the world would have come up with small-L liberal society on their own, I direct your attention no further than the African continent.

    33. Re: I support the telescope by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      There is no right to inherit, however there is a right to bequeath. Rockefeller Sr. had the right to give his property to his children. There is no "ancestral heritage".

      In the Hawaiian case, there is an implication from the U.S. Constitution that should be considered. The worst crime against the government is treason, yet even in the case of treason punishment by "corruption of blood" is forbidden, which means that the children of the offender may not be punished for the offender's crime. If that applies to treason, it ought to apply to all crimes. This applies to Hawaii in that the descendants of those who conquered the island should not be punished by being subject to the whims of the descendants of those conquered.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    34. Re:I support the telescope by pla · · Score: 2

      Congrats, you fail civics.

      Freedom of religion only says that the state won't explicitly promote or persecute any particular religion; or, more directly, that it won't do shit like codifying religious protections into zoning laws.

      It says fuck-all about whether or not a private entity has to give two shakes of a rat's dick about building a brothel on top of your holy meteorite or the bones of your ancestors or the spoooky places where your gods like to chill.

    35. Re:I support the telescope by Agripa · · Score: 2

      The same reason PETA protesters throw paint on women wearing furs but not bikers wearing leather.

  2. Where the TMT can go now by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 2

    There are not many places on Earth where a telescope of this size can go. Hawaii was chosen because of the near-ideal weather at high altitude, and a low Northern Hemisphere latitude, which would make the Thirty Meter Telescope an ideal companion to the European E-ELT now being built in Chile. So with Hawaii now out of the picture, where could we put it now?

    How about the Qinghai Plateau of Tibet (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tibetan_Plateau)? This is even higher than Maunakea, though the weather will not be as favorable and the latitude is somewhat too far north.

    1. Re:Where the TMT can go now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yeah, let's be like China, that's the model to emulate!

    2. Re:Where the TMT can go now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Hawaii isn't out of the picture, they have to re-apply for the permit. It will still be a lot quicker to do that than to start from scratch elsewhere, even if there is an ideal alternative. My money's on it going ahead in Hawaii eventually.

    3. Re:Where the TMT can go now by Punko · · Score: 1

      the TMT should be place in the most advantageous location that it is permitted to be placed. If Maunakea is not available, find the next best location. Fixation on a single optimal solution (from a technical position) does not usually result in the "best" solution. Environmental impacts need to be considered for any such project, including potential impacts to the social and economic environment of the local residents, to the cultural and historical environs, to the political situation, to the flora and fauna, and to also the overall economic validity of the project. A project may "score" very highly, but if it encounters a "show stopper" then the particular solution needs to be dropped, or modified to not run up against a show stopper.

      It sounds very much like certain cultural and/or historic factors were either overlooked or downplayed.

      --
      If only we could fall into a woman's arms without falling into her hands
    4. Re:Where the TMT can go now by Opportunist · · Score: 3, Interesting

      When it comes to dealing with extortion from people putting up religion as a front, yes.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    5. Re:Where the TMT can go now by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 3, Insightful

      China, as a major partner in TMT, has a sincere interest in seeing the project get built. Best of all, the Greens who are really behind this have no input to Chinese policy. Native objections could not have been crucial in stopping the TMT, because the site was in a designated telescope reserve inside a large environmental preserve on the mountain that has been run by University of Hawaii since the Sixties. The TMT would have been just the latest of many instruments built in the reserve. The Green campaign against TMT has been identical to their long but unsuccessful attempt to kill off the astronomy "industry" here in Arizona (http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007%2F978-94-010-0049-9_6#page-1).

      Additionally, China would love an opportunity to get a jump on a nation that it perceives being in decline, and would probably increase its commitment to the project. The Qinghai Plateau is in a poor part of the country that, unlike Hawaii, does not get much tourism because of its remoteness. The natives are going to love those construction and maintenance jobs.

    6. Re: Where the TMT can go now by Rei · · Score: 4, Informative

      It' not so much about altitude and weather as it is seeing conditions; Mauna Loa has among the best if not the best seeing conditions on Earth outside Antarctica. Good seeing depends in large part on how flat and uniform the terrain is for hundreds of kilometers upwind; high mountains on islands consequently tend to fare well (the Canary Islands are another good spot)

      The best known seeing location on Earth is in deep Antarctica. Unfortunately the location would make the costs prohibative.

      --
      I hate to bring up our imminent arrest during your crazy time, but we gotta move.
    7. Re:Where the TMT can go now by Prof.Phreak · · Score: 2

      Put it right next to the Mauna Loa Observatory. There's already a paved road leading all the way up, so it's not like a huge amount of infrastructure is required. Sure there might be an eruption in the next 100 years or so that could wipe it out, but... that's a problem for the next generation.

      --

      "If anything can go wrong, it will." - Murphy

    8. Re: Where the TMT can go now by Rei · · Score: 1

      ** Mauna Kea

      --
      I hate to bring up our imminent arrest during your crazy time, but we gotta move.
    9. Re:Where the TMT can go now by hackertourist · · Score: 1

      It is not clear that the TMT has to go somewhere else. The ruling was about the permit process, the university is free to apply for a permit again

    10. Re:Where the TMT can go now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Nope. Too risky. I get it, I get it, you want to feel the satisfaction of slapping down those you perceive as crooks, frauds, and schemers.

      The thing is, that IS a tempting feeling. Too tempting, and too prone to self-justification where you start applying it to any that you can.

      And the Chinese government? There model is not one of restraint and care, but self-righteous application of force, because truly, they are doing what is necessary and proper.

      A scary attitude, really. Sometimes it is true. But other times, well, it can be used to cover a multitude of sins.

    11. Re:Where the TMT can go now by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 3, Informative

      Yes, UH can theoretically reapply for a permit. The environmental qualification required for this mountain, independent of any native claims, is so intricate that doing it over again would take another fifteen years. Meanwhile, TMT components are already being built. I would rather see China grab the project than see us go through such a long permitting process all over again.

    12. Re:Where the TMT can go now by gtall · · Score: 2

      Only after China gives Tibet back to the Tibetans and apologizes for the atrocities they've committed there.

    13. Re:Where the TMT can go now by gtall · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Pay off the natives like they wanted, build telescope, leave religion behind.

    14. Re:Where the TMT can go now by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      You think it's too late to slip some 'cynism' tag into the next HTML specification?

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    15. Re:Where the TMT can go now by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

      This is another possible approach. Another out-of-box solution for getting the TMT built in Hawaii might be for the state to legalize pot.

    16. Re:Where the TMT can go now by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

      Your objection applied a generation ago, but the path away from Maoism is now firmly entrenched in China. It's today's up-and-coming industrial nation, just as the US was from the Gilded Age through WW II, and as such it appreciates the value of science. Certainly, building the TMT would be a point of national prestige, but we of the nerd community need to think of what's best for the science of astronomy, and the research bonanza that humanity will get from having a TMT as part of a north-south pairing of large scopes.

    17. Re:Where the TMT can go now by Fudge+Factor+3000 · · Score: 1

      The TMT consortium studied the viability of another northern site in Baja California, Mexico, which is almost as good as Mauna Kea. That could be another potential destination.

    18. Re:Where the TMT can go now by sunderland56 · · Score: 1

      the European E-ELT now being built in Chile.

      Funny, I'd have thought that astronomers would have taken at least *one* course in geography.

    19. Re:Where the TMT can go now by Quantus347 · · Score: 1

      The TMT project evaluated Five locations, with the Cerro Amazones site being the runner up. - Cerro Armazones, Antofagasta Region, Republic of Chile - Cerro Tolanchar, Antofagasta Region, Republic of Chile - Cerro Tolar, Antofagasta Region, Republic of Chile - Mauna Kea, Hawaii, United States (This site was chosen and approval granted in April 2013, but subsequently revoked in December 2015) - San Pedro Mártir, Baja California, Mexico

      --
      Common Sense isn't as Common as people think...
    20. Re:Where the TMT can go now by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

      That list of locations obviously preceded siting of the E-ELT, because the two are designed to work together. It's odd that Gran Canaria was not among them, but San Pedro Mártir is an interesting possibility.

    21. Re:Where the TMT can go now by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

      The Tibetan plateau is a huge place, so you're not restricted to locations near the Himalayas. There is already astronomical activity on the Plateau.

    22. Re:Where the TMT can go now by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      Living up to your name (but not so much your .sig), I see.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    23. Re:Where the TMT can go now by AdamThor · · Score: 1

      Nigeria?

      TMNT

      --
      -- "Oh. This guy again."
    24. Re:Where the TMT can go now by Agripa · · Score: 1

      Only if they get a permit to sue.

  3. Just tell them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    White man telescope GOOD. We bring you pretty BEADS.

  4. Ask the right questions by Opportunist · · Score: 5, Funny

    "Cut the crap, how much money to appease the spirits of your ancestors?"

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    1. Re:Ask the right questions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      "So I think what you're trying to say is that your mountain gods demand a casino under the telescope ?"

    2. Re:Ask the right questions by Translation+Error · · Score: 1

      "Come on, name a price already. Don't force us to take what we want at gunpoint again!"

      --
      When someone says, "Any fool can see ..." they're usually exactly right.
    3. Re:Ask the right questions by gtall · · Score: 1

      Appease? Hah? Ask them how much the spirits want and which escrow account to deposit the funds. And no naughty siphoning off the money by the natives, they aren't dead yet.

    4. Re:Ask the right questions by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Either's fine by me.

      When religion stands in the way of progress, religion is wrong. Simple as that.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    5. Re:Ask the right questions by Zak3056 · · Score: 2

      When religion stands in the way of progress, religion is wrong. Simple as that.

      Presupposing that all "progress" is good, and that religion is always bad surely is a simple position, in the sense of MW's 4th definition of the word.

      --
      What part of "shall not be infringed" is so hard to understand?
    6. Re:Ask the right questions by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Bargaining 101:

      Never make the first offer.
      Never make an open ended offer.

    7. Re:Ask the right questions by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Exposing 101

      Make it seem like an offer when your intention is to show that the other side isn't bargaining fairly.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  5. Sacred ground by sjbe · · Score: 5, Insightful

    A vocal minority of Hawaiians has vehemently protested the construction of the telescope for religious reasons.

    Don't you love how people can make up nonsensical stories about how something is sacred to them to stop activities they don't like? Sometimes they even believe the nonsense they are spouting. But it's still nonsense. Personally I find scientific inquiry to be sacred ground and I can actually show how scientific inquiry benefits mankind. If they want to show how this telescope will cause some objective problem (environmental, logistical, financial, whatever) then by all means let's slow down and consider if the telescope is a good idea. But religious objections carry no weight with me.

    So they have to hold a hearing so everyone can have their say. Fine. Hold the hearing. But religious objections are no grounds to stop construction of the telescope. Let them tell us how sacred this particular patch of ground is and then build the damn thing. I'm tired of people trying to trample valuable research because of their mythology.

    1. Re:Sacred ground by Punko · · Score: 1, Troll

      I'm tired of people trying to trample valuable research because of their mythology.

      Take a deep breath. Cultural or historic factors need to be taken in to consideration. If we simply discount our rich history, then we are no better than the fanatics destroying ancient monuments and statues in the desert.

      --
      If only we could fall into a woman's arms without falling into her hands
    2. Re:Sacred ground by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 2

      The Hawaiian natives are being played. The real agenda has nothing to do with native objections to a project that has less impact on the mountain than many things that have already been built on it.

      Read this and weep: http://dgrnewsservice.org/2015...

    3. Re:Sacred ground by avandesande · · Score: 1

      Unless there is something architectural in existence or a burial ground these things shouldn't even be allowed to go to hearing.

      --
      love is just extroverted narcissism
    4. Re:Sacred ground by bfpierce · · Score: 1

      Honestly I think the natives are sick of being trampled on by white people and their 'we do what we want cause we're smarter than you and also dibs'. And honestly I don't blame them.

    5. Re:Sacred ground by Sperbels · · Score: 1

      Maybe they're tired of white invaders

      Exactly: What have the Romans ever done for us?

    6. Re:Sacred ground by Sperbels · · Score: 3, Insightful

      What do you mean "white people"?

      They're US citizens. They can be elected into any political office. They have the same freedom as any white person in the most powerful country in the world. Their state has representation in the government, and they enjoy all benefits of any other state...including it's protection from other foreign invaders. Considering it's strategic location, their independence would be short lived if it wasn't part of the US.

      Or do you mean rich people doing what they want with their land? If so, then say that. Please don't include me (an average white non-rich Coloradoan) in your class war rhetoric.

    7. Re:Sacred ground by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 1

      > But religious objections carry no weight with me.

      Guess what, no one died and made you god to dictate your myopic opinion is the only one that matters.

      They were there first; they get to decide the laws.

      > I'm tired of people trying to trample valuable research because of their mythology.

      And I'm tired of arrogant people who can't respect other people's cultures.

      How do you respect yourself when you can't even respect others of differing opinion?

    8. Re:Sacred ground by PPH · · Score: 4, Insightful

      And I'm tired of arrogant people who can't respect other people's cultures.

      Science is a part of my culture. And I'm tired of people blocking its progress with silly religious objections.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    9. Re:Sacred ground by PPH · · Score: 1

      In that case, start building. If the Mountain God objects, she will stop the project with a bolt of lighning, lava flow, or something.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    10. Re:Sacred ground by erapert · · Score: 1

      Dude, use tags please.

    11. Re:Sacred ground by Krishnoid · · Score: 1

      Don't you love how people can make up nonsensical stories about how something is sacred to them to stop activities they don't like?

      Of course I did! And it wasn't just me, lots of other people did too.

    12. Re:Sacred ground by Punko · · Score: 1

      And I'm tired of arrogant people who can't respect other people's cultures.

      Science is a part of my culture. And I'm tired of people blocking its progress with silly religious objections.

      Not the same damn thing. No one is stopping scientific progress here. Its simply a choice between sites. This site is NOT the only one. It may be optimal from a purely technical point of view, but when you take in all considerations it may not be the optional solution. I'm sorry, putting your nuclear research centre downtown isn't a good idea. Find another location, and get on with your work.

      --
      If only we could fall into a woman's arms without falling into her hands
    13. Re:Sacred ground by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

      " In this case Native Hawaiians have their God on the mountain, while the astrologists have their gods of science, guns, bulldozers and the stars. Which side will win. Will Astrology triumph over the Mountain Gods' or will the Mountain God's pull off an upset and waylay the astrologists carefully laid plans to pry open and peer into the sky's nether regions with their big eye ball seeing thing."

      You sound like a typical Virgo.

    14. Re:Sacred ground by RightwingNutjob · · Score: 1

      Nope. Sorry. Aboriginal superstitions about sacred rocks do not live in the same universe as scientific (gasp!) risk assessments for nuclear reactors. Bullshit and fuzzy thinking have no reason to enter into any technical decisionmaking. Also, there are plenty of research nuclear reactors in dense urban areas. MIT has one in the middle of Cambridge, MA.

  6. Yey by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

    Yup. China will be first to Mars while the US sits around like Europe does, old men on their porches filled with no-longer-valid rhetoric of how great they used to be.

    --
    (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
  7. Something that isn't there. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Scientists in this case are discounting something that isn't there, not destroying stuff that is.

  8. Mauna Kea [Re:I support the telescope[ by Geoffrey.landis · · Score: 2

    If Maunakea is so sacred, why...

    The telescope is on Mauna Kea.

    In any case, neither Mauna Kea nor Mauna Loa was used as a bombing range. You're probably thinking of Pohakuloa.

    --
    http://www.geoffreylandis.com
    1. Re:Mauna Kea [Re:I support the telescope[ by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 3, Interesting

      "You're probably thinking of Pohakuloa."

      Yes, Pohakuloa on the lower slopes of Maunakea. And are they still running those Enduro 500-mile mud races?

  9. NIMBYs, nothing more, nothing less by Dereck1701 · · Score: 1

    NIMBYs have used "environmental concerns" for a few decades to try to scuttle things they don't like, I suppose it was only a matter of time before someone tried to use religion. There have been telescopes at that site for over 4 decades, if there religion was offended it was done and over with 2 decades ago.

  10. Most people in Hawaii are not white by sjbe · · Score: 2

    Maybe they're tired of white invaders trying to trample their natural landscapes and culture.

    In case you didn't notice Hawaii is the only state where white people are not the majority. Not even close. White people account for less than 20% of the population and they certainly aren't in a position to "trample" anything if the voting public cares about an issue. Hawaii has an asian plurality and if you've ever been to Hawaii (I have) you'll quickly note that almost all the white people are tourists. Nobody is getting trampled here and they work very hard in Hawaii to respect local traditions. There are already telescopes on top of this volcano and aside from a few crazies, people are fine with it. The notion that this one violates something sacred is ridiculous.

  11. We should make the natives live there. by Grog6 · · Score: 1

    That will fix this crap.

    --
    Truth isn't Truth - Guliani
  12. Nothing being damaged here by sjbe · · Score: 1

    Take a deep breath. Cultural or historic factors need to be taken in to consideration.

    This has nothing to do with history and probably not much about culture either. It's (allegedly) about religion which is a mythology. And frankly I cannot see any rational argument that this damages the culture or historical record of anyone. It's a telescope on top of a mountain which is not being used for any other purpose. So long as there is no environmental issue or property rights issue involved then there is nothing to discuss.

    If we simply discount our rich history, then we are no better than the fanatics destroying ancient monuments and statues in the desert.

    Really? You're going to go there and compare scientists to a bunch of religious loonies destroying ancient artifacts? Ok, tell me what is being destroyed here. Aside from the area directly being built upon, what tangible thing is being destroyed? How does this change history or our record of history in any way? Who or what is actually being harmed here?

    1. Re:Nothing being damaged here by tarpitcod · · Score: 5, Insightful

      In a falsifiability test between 'Hawaiian Magma Gods' and String theory, my money is on Hawaiian Magma Gods.

    2. Re:Nothing being damaged here by Skewray · · Score: 1

      In a falsifiability test between 'Hawaiian Magma Gods' and String theory, my money is on Hawaiian Magma Gods.

      Mod this +1. Caveat: I am biased and work for TMT.

    3. Re:Nothing being damaged here by Punko · · Score: 1

      This has nothing to do with history and probably not much about culture either. It's (allegedly) about religion which is a mythology. And frankly I cannot see any rational argument that this damages the culture or historical record of anyone. It's a telescope on top of a mountain which is not being used for any other purpose. So long as there is no environmental issue or property rights issue involved then there is nothing to discuss.

      Obviously you've never been involved in an Environmental Assessment Process. Cultural considerations, as well as aesthetic considerations can be show stoppers.

      Really? You're going to go there and compare scientists to a bunch of religious loonies destroying ancient artifacts? Ok, tell me what is being destroyed here. Aside from the area directly being built upon, what tangible thing is being destroyed? How does this change history or our record of history in any way? Who or what is actually being harmed here?

      I don't know exactly what is going on there. I am not an archaeologist, nor an anthropologist specializing in Hawaiian culture. But to discount the beliefs (which MAY be genuine) out of hand is 100% the same as blowing up idols because you believe they are not necessary. What is being destroyed ? Well, the locals, who are better informed that you or I, seem to feel that the construction would constitute a negative impact. The implicit assumption of "I know best" is the same. damn. logic. You don't care about their beliefs. Fine. Learn to respect the fact that others may not feel the way you do. You do not believe there is anything special, but I'm ok with you having that opinion. Let's check with the experts, and if they agree that the location is not suitable for the proposed usage, then you change locations.

      --
      If only we could fall into a woman's arms without falling into her hands
  13. This shouldn't be litigated at all. by jcr · · Score: 1

    Since we're talking about public land, just put it to a referendum. If the majority of Hawaii's residents want it, go ahead and build it. If not, cancel it.

    -jcr

    --
    The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
  14. Consider This... by mx+b · · Score: 2

    I don't know specifics of this project or the religious complaint against it, but consider this:

    Some projects may have an environmental or "beauty" impact (what if the top of the mountain has a beautiful view, and the project is about to cut down all the trees in the area and limit access to that view?). This telescope may do something like that. People are upset at losing a natural resource: the beauty of nature in their area. It should be a national park for future generations to enjoy the same view I enjoyed, they might say.

    So, they go to complain. But saying "I don't like this because it will ruin my view" will get everyone to laugh at you. "This is the cost of doing business", they tell you, "It's good for the local economy, and science, and whatever else." So they get ignored during the meeting and everyone goes about their business, not including the protestors.

    The protestors are frustrated but realize that the US takes freedom of religion very seriously. Suddenly the idea is to call the land sacred and that will get some more legitimate discussion on the topic -- no one wants to be seen as discriminating against a religion. Now, media is covering the loss of environment since you called it sacred. Now, business and project leaders are calling you to make deals. Now, you're included in the process.

    So what I pose to you is: is it possible that many of these "mythological" arguments in court are not actually completely sincere beliefs, but rather attempts to not be entirely trampled by the system? That freedom of religion is essentially a court "hack" that puts you on more equal footing?

    1. Re:Consider This... by Sperbels · · Score: 1

      Or, more likely, the right Hawaiian's pockets haven't been adequately filled yet.

  15. Pulled or revoked by ColoradoAuthor · · Score: 1

    In construction parlance, to "pull a permit" means to obtain a permit. The context makes it clear that isn't what the court did. TFA uses better wording: the permit was invalidated.

  16. Re:I oppose the telescope by Zak3056 · · Score: 1

    Good, there are 3 different giant telescopes in early stages of construction. Only 2, or maybe 1, giant telescope are truly needed.

    I'm sure they could just turn the one giant telescope around and look through the earth if they wanted to observe stars only visible from the other hemisphere.

    Fuck having more than one view of the sky, amiright?

    --
    What part of "shall not be infringed" is so hard to understand?
  17. Seems to me a trade would be in order by jensend · · Score: 2

    Maunakea isn't like the Matterhorn. The area on the Maunakea plateau that's high enough etc to suit astronomers' needs is actually quite large, and the Thirty Meter Telescope's proposed location is at least a mile away from the summit and at least 500 feet lower.

    But about 8 of the existing dozen or so scopes are practically right on the summit. Much more intrusive both to native sensibilities and to tourists. Built before cultural sensitivity was a thing, I guess, and before native Hawaiians had done much to organize politically. I think those opposed to the TMT may well largely be objecting to "one more straw" rather than to this telescope considered in isolation.

    If all these scopes were planned for new construction now I think a reasonable compromise would be to disallow putting any of them above about the 13400' contour on the summit. And I imagine that by now many of the scopes on the summit are no longer all that scientifically useful anyways, having been eclipsed by bigger scopes and better technology.

    Why not have a trade- go ahead and build the TMT, which will be a big scientific boon, but promise to gradually phase out and demolish the scopes on the summit and try to restore the summit area to a relatively pristine condition?

    1. Re:Seems to me a trade would be in order by jensend · · Score: 1

      Perhaps you're just poking fun at their sensibilities, but the question deserves a serious answer.

      If you look at a map, you can see the access road forks at about 13300' - the left spur stays on the plateau and goes to the Caltech observatory and on towards the proposed TMT site, while the right spur, which services the summit observatories, climbs almost all the rest of the way to the summit in the next mile.

      When the last of the telescopes on the summit is decommissioned (probably a couple decades away), that right fork could be reverted to a trail.

      Yes, many visitors wouldn't want to hike to the top from sea level, but I think people who visit the mountain would be perfectly fine with walking one mile with a few hundred feet of elevation gain to reach one of the world's great summits.

  18. Maybe I'm Cynical by BinBoy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    > vehemently protested the construction of the telescope for religious reasons.

    Maybe I'm cynical but I wonder if this is more about wanting a payoff than anything religious.

  19. Re:I oppose the telescope by sunderland56 · · Score: 1

    I'm sure they could just turn the one giant telescope around and look through the earth if they wanted to observe stars only visible from the other hemisphere.

    Yeah, the designers of the Earth should really have had it spin on an axis, so that you get a varying view of the sky. Then you could just locate your telescope near the equator, and see every star.

  20. Re:I oppose the telescope by Quantus347 · · Score: 1

    Without at least two able to view overlapping chunk of sky, there is a lot we cannot do and learn from them, or so Im told.

    --
    Common Sense isn't as Common as people think...
  21. Re:I oppose the telescope by Carnivore · · Score: 1

    The science that is done on these telescopes is almost entirely independent of hemishphere. They look at objects so faint and far away that there are billions in view of any site.

    At this price point, yeah, we should have one. The problem is that "private" scopes like Keck soak up a lot of NSF funds, having run them through the UC system, leaving less for "public" observatories like Gemini. It's using tremendous amounts of public funding to make a toy for very, very few people. It's much easier somehow to get money to build telescopes but running them seems not to be as attractive to the funding bodies.

  22. Re:I oppose the telescope by Zak3056 · · Score: 1

    Or hey, we could have one or two in each hemisphere and get even better views.

    --
    What part of "shall not be infringed" is so hard to understand?
  23. Re:More or less correct by spire3661 · · Score: 1

    " at least it was until the white man started killing them" Right and now its ALL OUR LAND. Hawaii belongs to the US, not the natives.

    --
    Good-bye
  24. ahupuaa? by laie_techie · · Score: 1

    Section 7. The State reaffirms and shall protect all rights, customarily and traditionally exercised for subsistence, cultural and religious purposes and possessed by ahupua’a tenants who are descendants of native Hawaiians who inhabited the Hawaiian Islands prior to 1778, subject to the right of the State to regulate such rights. [Add Const Con 1978 and election Nov 7, 1978]”

    It may be law, but it makes me uneasy when a religion becomes enshrined in law. I guess we're lucky they're not cannibals.

    As I remember from fourth grade, an ahupuaa runs from the mountain peak (mauka) down to the ocean (makai) so that each one is self sustaining. I'm having a hard time figuring out the correct ahupuaa for the location on Mauna Kea for the telescopes to determine which group of native Hawaiians have the right to protest under section 7 of the state constitution.

    Bummer, looks like /. doesn't support Unicode enough to write the okina

  25. Religious reasons? by PPH · · Score: 1

    The First Amendment to the United States Constitution prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion.

    Other reasons might be fine as a basis for revoking the permit. But it certainly does look like the Hawaiian Supreme Court blew it on this one.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  26. Re:I oppose the telescope by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

    Long baseline astronomy is one reason for the Chile-Hawaii pairing of two telescopes of the same size. The other problem is that there are no good sites under the murky tropical skies of the equator.

  27. 200 years from now by CanEHdian · · Score: 1

    I wonder how the Hawaiians will feel about this 200 years from now. At one point, the Holy Roman Church declared the Earth to be the Center of the Universe, and the Sun -like everything else- revolved around it. Not many, if at all, still believe that. Cultures and religions change over time.

    --
    When the copyright term is "forever minus a day", live every day like it's the last.
  28. Easy fix by ebvwfbw · · Score: 1

    Just put a cross on the hill someplace and call it a Christian mountain. That'll take care of it.

  29. Re:Dedicated to poverty by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

    Organizing across party lines generally means that the most corrupt of the members of each party join forces to screw the country. Those calling loudest for cooperating with the other party are either thinking "sucker!" or they are.

    --
    Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate