Do we really need another billion dollar telescope looking at things we've already seen from other billion dollar telescopes? Some in this thread fail to see the importance of the sacred land. I fail to see the importance of this telescope.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Jason Momoa says he can’t shoot Aquaman 2 due to protesting (construction of a giant telescope on sacred Hawaiian land)
- Thread starter Arthands
- Start date
Uhm, yes? It's better and higher resolution, it can look deeper into space, more telescopes means more observation projects can be done simultaneously.
I find it really amusing that people can be against an astronomic observatory of all things, it's like the most "net good" thing you could possibly come up with. Like, if it's going to be impossible to build it in Hawaii just bring it to the Canary Islands (In Mexico lol) but don't pretend a non-profit, multinational project run by research bodies in the name of science is somehow the evil hand of corporations or colonialism or a combination of such tropes.
Oh fuck, remembered reading mexico on the first page and thought it would be that location.
Yo I don't know what you're looking at but that does not seem to be the case here, at most it's just a few folk who are doing that and that is hardly what you'd call "filled". And how do you even know who's white? You got a database or something?
Anyways, it sounds like Momoa and other protesters are really making good progress getting the word out. Stuff like this happening on the islands rarely gets any sort of mainland press. Hopefully they get what they want or at least a compromise they can be happy with
You can make a statement with a 12% margin error which still gives us enough data to say that the majority of the native population is in favor of the telescope.
And where exactly did they say that construction was going to destroy the quarry or burial grounds? There's already been plenty of construction up there and no burial grounds or archeological sites have been disturbed. So basically you're creating false concerns and ignoring the data that shows a majority of the native population is for the telescope in order to advance your argument
Oh shit I legit thought you were joking 😂😂😂Oh fuck, remembered reading mexico on the first page and thought it would be that location.
Spoke like a true colonizer, fuck what natives want or believe!
The time for looking is over. The time for exploring is now. We haven't even been back to the moon! It's been 47 years!
What are you trying to say in the context of this topic?
There has been tons of research done on Stone Henge... They built visitors centers and lots of accomodations for excavation work. Stone Henge is a historical site but it's owned by the Crown, while Mauna Kea is under National Historic Preservation Act. They're not going to be building condos and a Subway there.
Uhm, i dont see how the two things are remotely related. A telescope that is meant for looking at places that humans will never visit because they are so far away (And you are looking at the past anyway) is not related with the exploration of the near space. Thats like saying we shouldnt be studying the functioning of the brain because we haven't come up with new antibiotics in decades.
No, it really isn't enough data to state that the majority of the native population is in favor. I know people love to think of statistics as being infallible but they absolutely are. I'm not at all creating false concerns. I'm pointing towards the factual cultural reasons for why this mountain is meaningful since those who take the stance "science > culture" feel that culture doesn't mean anything, even though it does. Human beings are not androids and there is a great value in the human experience that is informed by culture. Yes there are negative things in the history of various cultures. Just as there are negative things in the history of Science. One is not necessarily greater than the other.
However in this particular case, there are plenty of other locations that the Telescope can be placed that won't infringe upon the culture of an already decimated people who were nearly wiped from the Earth entirely (there were roughly 50,000~ left as of about one hundred years ago). So blocking this telescope from being situated on this particular mountain does not hinder Science in any meaningful way.
You know, explorers use these devices to see ahead of where they are, to determine safety and plan for their survival properly...god, what are those called...oh yeah, telescopes!!!
But seriously, I'm not defending destroying the sacred grounds, just pointing out the logic.
The usual casual bigotry and attempts at defending cultural erasure we see going on these threads that never gets called out.
Just to put it into perspective from a scientific point of view (which is ultimately irrelevant to the wants of the native Hawaiians):
This telescope will be more powerful than the Hubble telescope, despite being on land rather than in space. I think the figure I've seen is about 6 times more resolving power. This is pretty significant because the Earth's atmosphere is highly turbulent, which means any images you capture have wavefront distortions that can't be predicted due to the nature of chaos. That's why adaptive optics is used for real-time correction of wavefront distortions. With this telescope, we'll be able to see things that we wouldn't be able to see otherwise.
It's an extraordinary scientific feat, and I do hope the telescope gets built somewhere. Whether that'll be Mauna Kea or elsewhere isn't up to me and shouldn't be up to me.
Note that I am currently part of a project that supports a project that may end up being used in the telescope.
Well I think I've just figured out how to solve the Israeli-Palestinian land conflict. Screw the needs of the colonized, let's plop a big ol' research facility right there on the west bank. Science, bitches!! *drops mic*
Did you know Hawaii is now a state specifically so that the companies responsible for growing fruit on the island, owned mostly by white people because of course, would be able to avoid having to pay import tariffs on the goods produced? The McKinley tariff was basically killing the island's economy.
Did you know Hawaii is now a state specifically so that the companies responsible for growing fruit on the island, owned mostly by white people because of course, would be able to avoid having to pay import tariffs on the goods produced? The McKinley tariff was basically killing the island's economy.
Since you don't believe in statistics, how do you suggest we understand how the native population feels about this?
I didn't say that I don't believe in statistics. I said that statistics aren't infallible. Because they absolutely are not. And again, 78 out of 140k+ total natives is not a large enough sample size to make a conclusive statement. There have been much larger sample sizes that have been incredibly wrong. So we shouldn't take statistics as unobjectionable facts.
Instead of making assumptions as to how they should feel about it, we could always hear out their grievances with the project.
It is a large enough sample size at about a 12% margin of error with a 95% confidence level. Statistically speaking. There can be other problems with the methodology though, of course.
I think we should ask the native people how they feel instead of assuming how they or their ancestors would feel. Listen to their grievances instead of assuming.
Not necessarily. Statistics can be really unintuitive so I don't blame you, but a surprisingly small number of people can represent a very large group of people relatively accurately. An example of this is that in 2004, 1004 Americans managed to represent the entire population of the US at the time, 260 million, with a 95% chance that it is within 3% of the population value. (How can a poll of only 1,004 Americans represent 260 million people with only a 3 percent margin of error?)
Right, but if you're saying statistics can't capture the whole picture, what else should be done? How do we understand how the native population feels? Surely a protest by Jason Momoa and a group of other people (even if they're in the thousands) is also not necessarily a good enough sample size for a population of that size. It could be that a vast majority of the population doesn't care and only those who do care showed up.
This is some colonial bullshit. Totally disregard culture in the name of "science".
The natives don't understand our civilized, scientific culture! WE MUST MAKE THEM UNDERSTAND
Based on what Jest has been saying throughout the topic, I'm going to guess by doing a survey where they talk to the natives that view the site as sacred that is better crafted. The last survey has 414 respondents and about 124 were native Hawaiians. That one has a lower margin of error and they came back saying it was evenly split. If we're going to believe the consensus that the population is fine with it, you would think that we would want better data to better discern whether a 25 percent improvement in support is the result of an actual large change amongst the population or sampling and methodology errors. The previous survey also included unregistered citizens as opposed to only registered voters. If there is an overrepresentation of native Hawaiians amongst the 100,000 unregistered voters, their views would be even further distorted with surveys not focused on them.
Cry more. I said what I said. You are well within your rights to be upset by it.
This is a problem with discourse, whereas people don't read through entire conversations to get the entire context.
Which is something that I already pointed out earlier in the thread and not something that I should have to reiterate every time I reply. I'm not trying to be snarky with you here either. Anyone that knows statistics well enough should be aware of this, yet somehow it's rarely considered.
And there are cases where statistics are woefully inaccurate due to the methodology used. Something as simply as the technology used in taking a poll can cause stats to be incredibly inaccurate. As in the case of the 1936 Election of Roosevelt. Or more recently, in the case of several major entities predictions in Hillary v. Trump.
The most obvious way would be to ask the natives directly, since this has a major cultural effect on them. Whether that be through polling or asking for them to elect a council to represent them in the matter. The point is that more effort should be put into actually finding out how they feel than a random polling of the general populace of the state. That type of polling is fine for measuring what the state's residents overall feel but it's not good enough to determine how a particular sub-group feels.
Which is something that I already pointed out earlier in the thread and not something that I should have to reiterate every time I reply. I'm not trying to be snarky with you here either. Anyone that knows statistics well enough should be aware of this, yet somehow it's rarely considered.
And there are cases where statistics are woefully inaccurate due to the methodology used. Something as simply as the technology used in taking a poll can cause stats to be incredibly inaccurate. As in the case of the 1936 Election of Roosevelt. Or more recently, in the case of several major entities predictions in Hillary v. Trump.
The most obvious way would be to ask the natives directly, since this has a major cultural effect on them. Whether that be through polling or asking for them to elect a council to represent them in the matter. The point is that more effort should be put into actually finding out how they feel than a random polling of the general populace of the state. That type of polling is fine for measuring what the state's residents overall feel but it's not good enough to determine how a particular sub-group feels.
Im sorry, but the protestors are just wrong in this situation. This is one of the only places in the world that can support this telecscope, one of the best places on earth to see from. Most of the hawaiian economy is based off tourism, even more so on the big island where this would be, where getting a job is hard enough. The telescope project is investing a billion dollars in the local economy to create jobs for big islanders which would make a huge difference where unemployment rate is decently high. These are probally the same idiots who protest the geothermal plants that would help the big island become more renewable and less reliant on 100 percent non-renewable being shipped from outside the island. Most hawaiians support the telescope project, its just a loud vocal minority that is protesting.
The margin of error is at least 12% with a 95% ci for the data pertaining to native hawaiians , the pollster is not even arguing otherwise. A 12% margin of error would not get you very far in a scientific outlet. But again if someone was actually interested in knowing what the native hawaiians think such a study would be made and designed with such an aim as starting point.
edit: we are now at a point were the native hawaiians are not only labeled as "backwards" but also "idiots"...the language of science is so precise and eloquent.
Last edited:
I understand that. Just pointing out that the amount of people doesn't need to be a very large number. I agree that the entire poll needs to be looked at besides just the numbers themselves. A margin of error of 12% is huge and does not instill confidence at all.
Tbf he didn't say culture he said religion. Not all culture is religious.
Good on him for supporting the protest.
Also, I hope no one is taking the "can't shoot Aquaman 2" part seriously, that film isn't releasing until late 2022 and would be nowhere near starting production AFAIK
Also, I hope no one is taking the "can't shoot Aquaman 2" part seriously, that film isn't releasing until late 2022 and would be nowhere near starting production AFAIK
I'm not crying, just pointing out your obvious prejudices. Thank you for permission to be upset though. I'm not personally offended, just generally, as should you be were you to witness any human blaming an entire group of people for something, let alone said group not really being solely to blame in this case.
I guess just dont lump people together and maybe these mistakes wouldnt happen to you.
Good on him for standing up against this as angrily as he is.
But also, the amount of people on the first page who legitimately thought that Jason Momoa was run over by a bulldozer is one of the funniest fucking things I've seen in a while.
But also, the amount of people on the first page who legitimately thought that Jason Momoa was run over by a bulldozer is one of the funniest fucking things I've seen in a while.
Like I said, the only way to create peace in the middle east it to turn the entire west bank into a giant industrial/research park.
Since this is clearly aimed at me, the protestors represent a small but vocal minority and are not exclusively native hawaiians, and many of them do not even live on the big island. A majority of the population of the big island supports the telescope project, and in case you need an actual primer on the makeup of Hawaii, its a very diverse population with no majority ethnicity so its not being pushed exclusively by one ethnicity or demographic. Conflating all native hawaiiners as against the project is disengenuous. For reference I live in Pahoa so im not talking out of my ass here.
Eh, this isn't about money, this is about cultural heritage and other important intangibles for the indigenous peoples of Hawaii. It's a touchy subject.
