SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the they-will-just-have-to-hubble-along dept.
From Nature.com:
Hawaii's supreme court has ruled that the construction permit for the Thirty Meter Telescope (TMT) on top of the mountain Mauna Kea is invalid. The 2 December decision is a major blow to the international consortium backing the US$1.5-billion telescope, and a win for the Native Hawaiians who have protested against its construction on what they regard as a sacred summit.
And the top reddit comment on the article, which I found neatly summed up the situation.
I spent time in Hawaii and talked to locals that were born and raised there about this issue. Its polarizing.
People against it brought up the need for spirituality and respect for the Hawaiian culture lost over hundred of years of Western influence.
Argument for the telescope, however, claimed that building it would do nothing but respect their history. How did the ancient Hawaiians get to the island? They used the stars. It was "in their blood" to understand the heavens. Most of the those complaining are young disenfranchised people struggling in one of the crappiest economies in America.
Of course this could be a generalization based on second hand observation.
As for me, as big as these telescopes are, they look like ants on top of these massive volcanoes. Ruining the scenery is nonsense.
We covered the Groundbreaking for World's Largest Telescope nearly a month ago.
(Score: 5, Informative) by J053 on Friday December 04 2015, @11:57PM
Here's some background. The University of Hawai'i (UH) and the Thirty Meter Telescope consortium (TMT) applied for a Conservation District Use Permit (CDUP) before the Hawai'i Board of land and natural Resources (BLNR) back in 2010. The CDUP is needed because the entire summit area (50+ acres) of Maunakea is designated as a Conservation District, even though it is leased to UH as a Science Preserve. Several native Hawai'ian groups objected to the granting of the permit on various (religious, environmental, cultural) grounds. The objectors requested a contested case hearing before the Board (in accordance with Hawai'i law and BLNR's procedures). BLNR, (apparently) on advice from UH, decided to go ahead and grant the permit, but with a rather strange provision that construction could not begin until the contested case hearing was held ("First the Verdict, then the Trial!").
The opponents sued to block the permit on the (perfectly reasonable) grounds that the procedures were not properly followed. A Circuit Court of Appeals eventually sided with BLNR, and TMT started site preparation activities - this is what sparked the protests earlier this year. The appeal made its way to the State Supreme Court, which voided the Circuit Court ruling and remanded the case - specifying that procedures must be done in the proper order.
So, now UH and TMT can re-apply for their permit, the opponents will request a contested case hearing, and (probably) the permit will ultimately be granted. Complicating the picture is the fact that the master lease for the summit site expires in 2033 - unless TMT can begin construction (which is expected to take up to 5 years for construction of the building and assembly and testing of the telescope and all its associated optics and components) within the next year or so, they will have less than 10 years of guaranteed operation - which seems like too little for a $1+ Billion telescope facility.
I'm personally in favor of TMT, and completely against blocking a very interesting science facility because of "religion", but I have to admit that UH and TMT have handled this whole thing very poorly from the beginning. (I also work for one of the other observatories on Maunakea - I'll be retired before TMT comes online, so it doesn't affect me personally, but I'd hate for the local folks who are interested in STEM careers to miss out on a great opportunity like this).
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday December 05 2015, @12:11AM
> I'm personally in favor of TMT, and completely against blocking a very interesting science facility because of "religion"
If it helps, don't think of it as "religion" think of it as opposition to yet another manifestation of colonialism. 20 years ago the US formally apologized for illegally overthrowing the kingdom of Hawaii. [wikipedia.org] But actions speak louder than words and telescope construction on Mauna Kea (I don't know why but your 'Maunakea' typo really got under my skin) has been an especially visible form of the hypocrisy of that apology. If we are going to claim to be respectful of people and ashamed of historical injustices then we have to walk that walk even when it means we don't get what we want.
(Score: 2) by J053 on Saturday December 05 2015, @01:52AM
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday December 05 2015, @03:12AM
I guess things have changed in the last two years.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday December 05 2015, @06:49PM
They have [hawaii.edu].
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday December 05 2015, @03:39AM
> If it helps, don't think of it as "religion" think of it as opposition to yet another manifestation of colonialism.
No, let's think of it for what it is, leveraging religious superstition for extortion. Like it or not, Hawaii is a state no matter how it came into existence, and the science reserve is a state trust. The state can do whatever the fuck it wants to with the land as long as state officials deem it worthwhile, no matter how long and loud the SJWs whine. At present (and as usual), the state is bending over backwards for a handful of militant Hawaiians who are using "religious" claims to push their own political agenda, and the SJWs around the world are falling for it. Apologize for colonialism? Why not for electricity, medicine, education, sanitation and technology while you're at it?
(Score: 3, Insightful) by K_benzoate on Saturday December 05 2015, @06:37AM
Apologize for colonialism? Why not for electricity, medicine, education, sanitation and technology while you're at it?
SJWs probably don't consider those things to be improvements over the way of life the people had before. It's the same racist "noble savage" mentality of two centuries ago coming into fashion again.
Climate change is real and primarily caused by human activity.
(Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Monday December 07 2015, @05:10PM
Like it or not, Hawaii is a state no matter how it came into existence,
Correct, and as a State, it's inhabitants are entitled to to their constitutionally protected due process rights.
We have this thing called freedom of religion here. We may disagree with it, but if the law of the land requires a contested hearing then a contested hearing must be provided.
(Score: 2) by lentilla on Saturday December 05 2015, @07:31AM
I'd hate for the local folks who are interested in STEM careers to miss out on a great opportunity like this
You are failing to see the upside of this. STEM is hard. You have to know; like; facts 'n stuff. And you can't argue your way out of a tight spot when the facts say otherwise, either.
So, if you happen to be counselling young people as to a profitable career, now they have another option. In the past, you might have suggested law. Now you can also suggest religion as an alternative. Better yet: religion and law.
Simply adjust reality to how you'd like it to be, find some kind of legal argument, and profit. No pesky realities (gravity, laws of physics, that kind of thing) need get in your way.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Saturday December 05 2015, @09:03AM
they will have less than 10 years of guaranteed operation - which seems like too little for a $1+ Billion telescope facility.
Sometimes you have to walk away, start looking for a site in Chile or Peru or where ever the second best location.
If the natives are demanding religion over knowledge there is no amount of arguing that will allow the safe installation and operation of that Billion dollar investment. No point in putting it someplace you need armed guards to keep the Luddites away.
Those who want to pursue STEM need to get off those islands into the world of serious people. My sister raised two boys that went on to be rocket scientists (yes, I'm serious) and she sent both of them off the Islands to do it.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 04 2015, @11:58PM
> As for me, as big as these telescopes are, they look like ants on top of these massive volcanoes. Ruining the scenery is nonsense.
A dismissive line like that really impugns the speaker's credibility. The scenery is something hotel operators care about, not the people who took this to court.
One thing should be made clear here - this ruling is not against the telescope. it is against the politicians ram-rodding the construction permit through the system without following the legally required process. This is the first step towards compromise.
Source: I used to work at CFHT. [hawaii.edu]
(Score: 2) by J053 on Saturday December 05 2015, @12:01AM
(Score: 3, Touché) by ataradov on Friday December 04 2015, @11:59PM
Let's stop science in favor of "spirituality".
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday December 05 2015, @12:37AM
These Hawaiians don't want fugly buildings on the beautiful mountain that makes them feel good when they look at every day. Spirituality or not, they should have a say. It's simple respect, and really no different than not wanting people building stuff in the Grand Canyon or Yellowstone.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday December 05 2015, @05:49AM
If they want to look at something pretty, they can turn around and look at some of the best beaches in the world. And yes, people do build things in the Grand Canyon area and Yellowstone. If we have to respect everyone's aesthetic tastes before progress is made, we would have never made it to the stoneage.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Saturday December 05 2015, @09:14AM
They can't see the telescope from were they live. In fact you can't even see the mountain from most places on the Island. (Fire up street view if you don't believe me).
Its not that they don't get a say. They want the final say, no point counting the votes, and to hell with every other opinion.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by tizan on Saturday December 05 2015, @12:15AM
There might have been mistakes and bad politics etc...
But there are only 2 places in the world for such a telescope ... Hawaii and Chile
So if we are to do such development and science we have to go to these two places...
There are plenty of telescopes up there...so what is the issue:
I think Hawaiians are partly reacting to the way some telescope operators dump stuff around the mountain etc.....ram battering your way for the next telescope brought it to a boil.
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday December 05 2015, @01:33AM
There's a better place than both of those... About 100 miles straight up↑
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday December 05 2015, @05:49AM
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday December 05 2015, @05:52AM
More importantly, the local populating has elected to fight 1.5 billion dollars in development. With such prosperity, perhaps we could reallocate their federal tax funds to build out NASA instead. Let them be unemployed in their spiritual paradise.
(Score: 2) by Murdoc on Saturday December 05 2015, @12:20AM
As for me, as big as these telescopes are, they look like ants on top of these massive volcanoes. Ruining the scenery is nonsense.
Giant ants WOULD ruin the scenery! That'd totally freak me out. Now maybe if you said they looked like resistors or something...
:p
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday December 05 2015, @01:20PM
I, for one, welcome our telescope overlords.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Saturday December 05 2015, @01:04AM
Mars Science Laboratory cost just $2.5 billion.
I bet we could robotically build an observatory on the far side of the moon for a similar sum and get better results than Hawaii/Chile scopes, even with fancy adaptive optics.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 3, Informative) by J053 on Saturday December 05 2015, @01:59AM
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday December 05 2015, @02:08AM
The mirror in Hubble wasn't replaced. They added smaller optics later in the path that corrected the mistake in the big primary mirror.
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday December 05 2015, @02:06AM
You'd think that, but there are two things you want out of a telescope: sensitivity and resolution. While the atmosphere causes problems with resolution that we're working on fixing with adaptive optics, there's no substitute for mirror area when it comes to sensitivity. With area comes weight, and weight is a big problem for anything in outer space. That's why these adaptive optics experiments can compete with space based stuff.
You also have the interesting problem of trying to couple a camera with enough pixels that aren't too large or too small to these things. All that extra resolution doesn't do you any good if the image is pixellated, so, in order to keep weight down, your telescope is likely to have a smaller field of view the greater the resolution. The James Webb Space Telescope, for example, will have a field of view that's about 1/30th of a degree by 1/30th of a degree (about 1/15th the full moon).
Speaking of JWST, that's a much better comparison. For a mirror that's specced at 6.5 meters it has cost around $9 billion. Now, JWST also has the advantage that an infrared telescope in space doesn't have to worry as much about the whole earth, sky, and telescope glowing in the wavelengths your trying to observe, so it has those advantages. It's disadvantage is that it will only carry enough fuel for 10 years of operation, and won't be serviceable the way Hubble was. Though for the cost of trying to service the old one you could probably launch a new one.
Worse, the dust on the moon would be a problem for the machinery and mirrors. Why spend the extra fuel needed to land the observatory when it will be happier in orbit? The only reason for the moon to be between an observatory and Earth is to block out radio noise, and even then I'd think it would be better at the the Earth-Moon L2 Lagrange point. Otherwise, your observatory is much better off at Earth-Sun L2 where it's out of the sunlight, or in Earth orbit. The Spitzer Space telescope, interestingly, is in orbit around the sun, the distance between it and Earth slowly growing over time until they'll meet coming around the other side.
(Score: 5, Informative) by Covalent on Saturday December 05 2015, @03:11AM
Here's the problem: The TMT folks just went and followed the procedures. They got a permit and figured "Hey, we're good."
I'm from Detroit, so I know better. ;)
The reality is, if you want to get something done, and there's entrenched interests, you have to pay them. That's just the reality of doing business with "local community members" (aka Irrational Pseudo-Owners...see below)
Now, before you go and say "Hey, this guy is using Detroit as an example! That shithole didn't get anything right!!!", I totally agree with you. I'm not at all suggesting that anyone should PURPOSELY emulate Detroit.
But this situation is already mired in a Detroit-like state. You've got a group who holds considers the area "theirs" (the aforementioned Irrational Pseudo-Owners). They don't officially have rights to it, but they act like it's theirs and there is no way that will ever change. The locals in Detroit act very much like this. Try to close a school in Detroit and you'll see it in action, even though the population of school-aged children in Detroit is about 1/2 what it once was and the school is crumbling to pieces.
So how do you get things done in a situation like that?
1. You pay off the protesters.
2. You publicly agree to build a "community center" nearby.
3. You guarantee a certain amount of the employment to locals.
4. You establish a foundation to help poor members of the community.
Or, in shorter terms, you grease palms. Lots and lots of palms.
Mike Illitch (owner of Little Caesars Pizza and the Detroit Tigers and Red Wings) wanted to build a new hockey stadium in Detroit to replace the dilapidated one they use now. The land he wanted was nearly worthless, as is much of the land in Detroit. But the minute he announced the plans for a new hockey stadium, suddenly those land owners cried foul. "This parcel is precious to me!" and that sort of thing.
But Illitch has been doing business here for decades. It was amazing how quickly the sacred ground was acquired, and the city council appeased, and the county government approval was procured, and the state government was placated, and the federal government and on and on and on. Everybody got paid in one way or another. Doesn't hurt that Illitch is a billionaire many times over.
tl;dr --> They didn't bribe enough people. That is why they are failing right now.
You can't rationally argue somebody out of a position they didn't rationally get into.
(Score: 0, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday December 05 2015, @03:18AM
You are a dick. Seriously, it takes a huge amount of dickhood to utterly dismiss people whom you've never met and don't know a thing about as looking for nothing more than a payout. Many of the people involved in this lawsuit are dirt poor because their ancestors got royally screwed out of their property when the islands were illegally annexed and yet they don't expect to make a dime from this. Don't be that guy who lives down to the stereotype of the haole.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday December 05 2015, @06:03AM
Legally. Legally annexed. You can't claim someone annexing your land is illegal when you have no law against it and openly welcome the annexation, or rather all the monetary benefits that went along with it. Hey, just like what they are doing here again, wanting money for nothing. Yeah, they are dirt poor. Yeah, they want money. Why is it surprising when people call bullshit on claims of beauty and spirituality when a poor person asks for more money? People that deny their own greed when holding out their hands for more should be utterly dismissed.
As for your racism, when in doubt, switch words to see if you are a hateful bigot that deserves no respect on this earth or any other.
A slur is a slur even if you think you are right in using it.
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday December 05 2015, @04:29AM
These people making dismissive comments about the protesters blocking science, I bet most of them have never been to the big island of Hawaii. Maybe some have traveled to Oahu, Maui, or Kauai on vacation. But the big island is different - it doesn't have the big cities or the mansions or golf resorts but it has two mighty mountains, with active volcanoes, and hundreds of acres of fields covered with recent lava flow. It's a spiritual place.
You don't just barge in there and say, we're going to put this big honking scientific observatory (or oil rig, cell tower, amusement park, etc) on the top of one of these mountains. You go there and and set up camp and live for a number of years and work with the locals on what makes sense.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday December 05 2015, @04:49AM
You are really laying it on pretty thick. I was born on the big island and know plenty of people who live in mansions and there is definitely no shortage of golf resorts.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday December 05 2015, @04:54AM
Are you kidding? I drove all around that island to visit the volcano and I saw shacks and lava fields and macademia fields everywhere I looked. OK, Kona has an interesting strip, but even that wasn't luxury stuff.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday December 05 2015, @06:07AM
Wow you really don't know when to stop lying. You can see the volcano from nearly everywhere. There is no "drove all around the island". Be within a few miles of the shoreline and you can see the friggin thing.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday December 05 2015, @03:38PM
You made it up, didn't you. About growing up on Hawaii.
Didn't you, you little liar. You grew up in the suburbs of Indiana and that's where you still are, in the exact same house 25 years later.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday December 05 2015, @06:13AM
Looks like the other guy was right.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 06 2015, @02:12AM
The aesthetic objection could be overcome if the building were made to look like a natural part of the landscape, rather than just painting it white as is typically done to enclosures for telescopes. I suppose that a dark-coloured dome would become hot during the day, and the heat could cause the optics to deform, but it may be possible to incorporate insulation into the design of the dome, or to compensate for the deformation.
(Score: 2) by Covalent on Sunday December 06 2015, @02:59AM
Fantastic idea! You could build a wall around the complex that looks more or less like additional mountain. You'd obscure the very low angles for the telescope, but that might be an acceptable compromise. You'd also reduce the wind on the telescope, which would potentially improve the optics.
You can't rationally argue somebody out of a position they didn't rationally get into.