Pic from Huntington Post: Clash Over $1.4 Billion Telescope At Sacred Hawaiian Site Intensifies
Ordinarily I will side with the native people anywhere when there is a quarrel with the government because, well, the government is always wrong.
In this case, that may not be so. This is ancestral ground for native Hawaiians and the telescope is ugly like a pimple on yer nose but I do not see it as disrespectful of the ancestors. The people who will use this telescope have a deeper respect for antiquity than anyone on the planet as a millennium is an eye blink to them.
They're looking for the oldest part of the Universe so, in many respects, they are looking for the ancestors of us all. They will do it in silence and absolutely without any light so I really do think what they will do is as respectful of the ancestors as it can be without giving it up altogether.
If it were their purpose to install an oil rig or a microwave tower, I'd say bomb the damn thing but I really don't see what they intend as disrespect.
11 comments:
I think the disrespect is not rooted in a disdain for the telescope or astronomy, but rather that the decision is made with little involvement from the indigenous Hawaiians. Essentially, Hawaii is an illegally occupied sovereign nation. Before the U.S. overthrew the ruling Queen of Hawaii in the 1890's, Hawaii was recognized worldwide as a respected sovereign nation. There's been discontent ever since. Even President Clinton acknowledged the wrong with an official apology during his time in office.
So as long as this $1.3B monstrosity is for something you like it is ok to destroy the sacred land. It is not just a telescope it is massive infrastructure to go with it. And with most plans like this the locals were probably stepped on or at least bypassed.
But if it were a big $1.3B battery plant that woukd be wrong to step on scared land for that.
The Dakotas are available And how many telescopes are needed out there anyway
Your summary is a bit harsh as I suggest it's possibly a compromise given what they do. It may well be sacrilege to even be in this place, I don't know. I don't mean to be facetious in saying aboriginal men in Australia regard it as sacrilege if a woman even touches a digeridoo, much less plays one.
Maybe I was using the 'it sucks less' logic as this at least isn't an oil pipeline. I suspect the number of available sites drops quickly as places far enough from city lights become harder to find. As to how many they need, maybe lots more. I really do see it as looking for the ancestors as just what really is out there.
Hawaii is already home to several of the largest telescope platforms in the world.
And the simple little dome you show doesnt really do justice to the entire project. That is probably only one of many platforms for the site Use the present site of Mauna Kea as a good basis of the new project
The sucks less logic is kind of full of crap. And the low number of available site logic doesnt work either.
Even the logic of the need for the total array of platforms to be able to view in any direction at any time falls short as there are already the top platforms in Hawaii. This is just the UofH astronomy dept wanting to be the biggest dick on the block They already have two huge complexes and want another
You may be right and it's the same syndrome as university presidents who don't make their bones until they put up an ugly-ass modernistic building somewhere on campus.
The reason for enthusiasm about more observation is all they really get so far is noise and what I get from that is the listening kit isn't worth a damn so they need better kit or more of it.
They can build on the present platform instead of trashing new land
Or go to the Dakotas no lives there anyway
But if I was an astronomer why would I trade Hawaii for the Dakotas I have no idea if the Dakota are either sacred or viable
Sudden thought that what places get less city light than anywhere else on the planet: the Poles. It'd be a bitch to maintain such a site but the next best after that, I believe, is the area up in the mountains in Chile and that isn't so hospitable either. It'd be pretty cool to do your stuff in Hawaii but I doubt it's the best in the world for getting away from city light.
Look what the researchers did to McMurdo. Hawaii is important as part of the array that allows 24/7 vision in all directions. But why build a third complex.
And California has rights the water but the locals dont for their land PS California has been stealing water from the Colorado to the point it is just a trickle at the end
Can't answer the first and the second part is complicated. I really don't want to get into who steals it as the water is tapped by every state along its course and who knows what that has cost Mexico as it must have been valuable for agriculture but then it mostly dries up. One thing's for sure that there's not enough to support all the demands for it. I checked the Colorado snowpack and that's at 70% of normal. Hardly a disaster but not the best of signs.
Lake Mead is at 42% capacity Very scary long term for Southern California.
The researcher station should be listed as a chemical dump site.
It's grim stuff as the Texas drought is abating but there's no relief for California. Here they pick it up more from rain than from snowpack and Lewisville Lake, the largest reservoir I could spot in the DFW area, is at 83% capacity. That ain't too bad.
Post a Comment