Jason Momoa says he can’t shoot Aquaman 2 due to protesting (construction of a giant telescope on sacred Hawaiian land)

Nov 9, 2017
1,568
I don't get how people are equating a telescope with say an oil pipeline or harmful experiments towards minorities. The telescope would be a net benefit to society and not harm the environment or any people in any meaningful way. There are already other telescopes on the mountain and many natives seem to be in favor of it.
 

Sokrates

Avenger
Oct 27, 2017
545
First bolded part, what does that even mean? So you want us to just ignore data from scientific experiments if it doesn't prescribe to your world view?

Second bolded part, that's not what I said at all. What I said was that the latest polling shows a majority of the native people are for the observatory. Also the fact that there are already multiple telescopes, what makes this one any different? I have yet to hear a single good reason not to build this telescope, people keep bringing up burial grounds and archeological sites, none of which is threatened by this new construction.

The decision to not tell black people that they weren't actually getting a cure to syphilis was not based off of science, it was based off of racism. Science didn't tell them to only let the black people suffer.
First bolder part means people using science as a justification to do bad things to vulnerable groups because in the end it advances humanity. It’s how you end with birth control being tested on Puerto Rican women without their informed consent in the 1950s and how you end up with the eugenics movement of the 1920s. NO ONE is attack science as a means of acquiring knowledge, but as a rhetorical device used as a carte blanche to use against vulnerable groups.

And in the case of Tuskegee, racists used the language of science (scientism) to justify their bad behavior to black people who weren’t informed of their tests.

Again no one is blaming SCIENCE THE METHOD, but SCIENCE THE RHETORICAL DEVICE.
 
Mar 3, 2019
37
People flying from Oahu and the mainland can be people who grew up in the area. My gf, for example, is from Hilo but lives in Honolulu. Mauna Kea is important to her as is the Big Island itself.

I get that there is a lot of money involved. I do. I know the Big Island can use quite a bit of expenditure to help alleviate many issues. There are ways to do that without the telescope. My problem is that we've taken enough from indigenous peoples as it is so it's hard for me to get behind this.
The Big island is almost entirely reliant on tourism, if that gets messed up, say like what happened during the eruption, the whole area gets severley effected. No disrespect, but your girlfriend is exactly the person im talking about, doesn't live on the big island but wants to dictate to those that live here how it should be run. Hilo and Kona are the two richest cities in the big island, the observatories exist in areas that are extremely depressed economically, I should know, I live in Pahoa which is around one of those areas. These protestors are the same ones that protest geothermal plants, and they keep the big island in a really bad situation because of it. 1 billion dollars is a lot in an area where a burger king moving in is considered a big development. What exaclty would you propose to raise the money for the big island?
 

Bitmap Frogs

Member
Sep 16, 2018
670
This situations makes me think about Henritta Hicks, the woman modern medicine was built off of, but they didn't even want to acknowledge she was a living being cause of "reasons". It's always the ones that have the least to lose that end up having their shit bargained away with little to no input from them
If you're talking about Henrietta Lacks and the cell line HeLa, you have some facts wrong.
 

Thordinson

Member
Aug 1, 2018
1,362
The Big island is almost entirely reliant on tourism, if that gets messed up, say like what happened during the eruption, the whole area gets severley effected. No disrespect, but your girlfriend is exactly the person im talking about, doesn't live on the big island but wants to dictate to those that live here how it should be run. Hilo and Kona are the two richest cities in the big island, the observatories exist in areas that are extremely depressed economically, I should know, I live in Pahoa which is around one of those areas. These protestors are the same ones that protest geothermal plants, and they keep the big island in a really bad situation because of it. 1 billion dollars is a lot in an area where a burger king moving in is considered a big development. What exaclty would you propose to raise the money for the big island?
She lived on the Big Island for most of her life. Being from a place, Hilo in this case, doesn't mean she didn't live in other areas which she did. Her brother and their family, whom she went with, are both from the area as well. Though, it's not like just because you grew up in a "rich" place, one cannot be poor or live in poor conditions.

That's not up to me decide. I'm merely a spectator with tiny connection to the whole thing. If it gets built and the people love it, then they do. I'm just wary of harming indigenous peoples and their culture is all.
 

Funyarinpa

Avenger
Oct 26, 2017
7,815
I fucking LOVE space. I'm studying to become an astrophysicist, I've literally structured my future around my love for space. Naturally, that involves an admiration of and appreciation for telescopes. I have no relation whatsoever to Hawaii, but I am in a position to really benefit from the TMT. Someday I might get to analyze data it has observed.

If this were about me and my culture (assuming it had a natural landmark my people considered as sacred as the Hawaiian people consider Mauna a Wakea), I would've probably supported the TMT being built on such a landmark still. I have little sense of spirituality, but for me building a device to scour the heavens would be a fitting way to celebrate and respect a tradition of appreciating nature. If Native Hawaiians held counsel among themselves without coercion someday and decided somehow that they'd be okay with the TMT, I'd celebrate that, because that would mean we would be getting an incredible amount of significant astronomical data for decades to come.

And not one of that matters one bit. I'm still against the TMT being built on Mauna Kea.

Astronomy is basically looking up at the sky. It's a beautiful -and harrowing- thing, it's fascinating, it's an ancient tradition. I've made it, perhaps, my life's purpose.

And thanks to that passion for astronomy, I KNOW that nothing about it should be harmful. It's possible to look up at the sky without hurting other people. And it's not worth hurting people for, either. I don't want astronomy to be tainted by such a legacy.

And clearly, the scale of the protests shows that there's significant dissent from Native Hawaiians. If they wouldn't feel hurt by the construction and operation of the telescope, they wouldn't be protesting. That's enough for me to understand that there's no consensus among the natives of Hawaii, and that in itself is enough reason to be skeptical about TMT's place on the Maunakea summit at least.

And of course, the parallels to colonialism are still there.

The permits for the construction of the TMT weren't given by Native Hawaiians, the TMT didn't report to Native Hawaiians, the courts in which subsequent cases were held didn't follow a law determined by Native Hawaiians. It's not the Native Hawaiians who took law enforcement officers up there a month ago to deter protesters, it's not the Native Hawaiians who arrested protesters.

Everything these protesters face -legally or otherwise- is imposed upon them by a government that invaded them in the past.

If you want the TMT on Mauna Kea to be a thing the correct stance to take would be to understand and respect Native Hawaiians' right to self-determination (and determination of the future of a site central to their culture), and hope that they'll agree with you someday, while standing against current operations by the government on Mauna Kea, as they're doing nothing but trampling on a nation's society, culture and history.

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.
The TMT will be basically a generational leap in astronomical observation (regardless of where it is ultimately built). It's designed to be able to detect remarkably faint amounts of energy over literally astronomical distances, and also it being in the Northern Hemisphere is important for the telescope to be able to verify observations made by telescopes in the Southern Hemisphere. It'll be an upgrade that isn't possible on currently existing telescopes. It's like getting prescription glasses for the first time and being able to read at far or close distances.

As with much of cutting-edge science, it is costly (money wise), but it would be a major boon to modern astrophysics, like what CERN is to particle physics.



I don't get how people are equating a telescope with say an oil pipeline or harmful experiments towards minorities. The telescope would be a net benefit to society and not harm the environment or any people in any meaningful way. There are already other telescopes on the mountain and many natives seem to be in favor of it.
Possible mismanagement and environmental damage -reportedly previously happened with other telescopes on the summit- is harm. Harming cultures of native peoples who have already been put through colonialism is harm.
 
Mar 3, 2019
37
Is this a serious question?
Yes? The poster in question said that there are others ways to bring money into the island than the telescope(which is required to invest 1 billion in the local economy to build there), so i asked what would be some alternatives. The big island is heavily reliant on tourism, and that was messed with during the eruption which depressed the economy here.
 
Oct 27, 2017
4,151
Spain
Something forced on brown people in the name of science
25% of Hawaii's population is white and about 70% supports the project... Even if 100% of the white people supported the project, that would mean a majority of the nonwhite population supports the project as well.

That is, before you actually think about what you are saying and realize the construction of an observatory is not the same as infecting numerous people with syphilis?

And on top of that, you are implicitly saying that the TMT project is solely promoted by white people, and solely opposed by nonwhite people, and that it has been approved by a solely white government and judiciary that was only elected by white people, which is simply false.
 
Nov 1, 2017
102
DFW, Texas
I stand behind this train of thought.

I watched the video and her main arguments are, america sucks for taking over Hawaii. Some people built telescopes without permits. There have been accidental chemical spills. Scientists are people too and can also believe in sacred hoobla. Just because we say it will be different doesn't mean it will be. And the crown cherry at the end, she goes on to say their sacred nonsense has value. It doesn't. While I understand there are environmental impacts, this is quite literally being built in order to advance humanity in a very important way and it needs to be judged with that knowledge in mind. She even talks about how this spot is amazing for studying the stars, it's not like this place was selected at random or is being used to pillage natural resources, it's sadly a case of no progress without risk. The risks in situation sound minor and it does sounds like it boils down to superstition vs. a place to commit acts of science. The video didn't sway my opinion, it only reaffirmed it.
Then we should just bite the bullet and make a giant scientific installation on the Ka'aba in Mecca since sacred hoobla doesn't have value. Or how about the Temple Mound in Jerusalem? Your Ayn Rand "we must not be tied down by our superstition and petty morality in order to advance" is basically spitting in the face of a people's religious tradition -- so either go all in & burn all the sacred places down or accept that people have a right to save their holy mountain.
 

Bitmap Frogs

Member
Sep 16, 2018
670
My bad tanking her name, did they use her tissue without her consent? Did she not start recieiving credit for her "contribution" until the late 90s?
It's a wild exageration that HeLa is the foundation of modern medicine. I mean it's tremendously important but not foundational.

I don't know what you mean about not acknowledging her as a living being? Cultivated cell lines are not a "human", there's nothing to acknowledge there.

You are right that there was no consent requested because it wasn't the practice at the time. It didn't matter if the patient was white or black, it was common practice at the time to extract cells and culture them.

I'd argue that Lacks case makes for a poor comparison with the TMT given that it was by chance that her cell line happened to be the first to become immortal in the lab. She was not targeted because he was disadvantaged.
 
Oct 27, 2017
4,151
Spain
Then we should just bite the bullet and make a giant scientific installation on the Ka'aba in Mecca since sacred hoobla doesn't have value. Or how about the Temple Mound in Jerusalem? Your Ayn Rand "we must not be tied down by our superstition and petty morality in order to advance" is basically spitting in the face of a people's religious tradition -- so either go all in & burn all the sacred places down or accept that people have a right to save their holy mountain.
That comparison is just nonsensical. Mauna Kea is a huge mountain, and it just so happens to be the best location in the whole northern hemisphere for astronomical observation. It wasn't chosen because some people deem it sacred, but because of the outstanding characteristics of the site.
 

Thordinson

Member
Aug 1, 2018
1,362
That comparison is just nonsensical. Mauna Kea is a huge mountain, and it just so happens to be the best location in the whole northern hemisphere for astronomical observation. It wasn't chosen because some people deem it sacred, but because of the outstanding characteristics of the site.
It could be fairly apt. What if Temple Mound was one of the best locations instead of Mauna Kea?
 

Xaszatm

Member
Oct 25, 2017
7,566
That comparison is just nonsensical. Mauna Kea is a huge mountain, and it just so happens to be the best location in the whole northern hemisphere for astronomical observation. It wasn't chosen because some people deem it sacred, but because of the outstanding characteristics of the site.
And how utterly convinient how minorities landmarks and sites of import are always so perfectly valuable for others to trample over.
 

Xaszatm

Member
Oct 25, 2017
7,566
Guys, Doc Ocks “science is more important than anyone else” philosophy isn’t a thing to idealize
 

Rupetta

Member
Oct 27, 2017
728
Boston/Helsinki
The local government supports the telescope, which is why they signed off on it, the state government signed off on it, a majority of the population that includes many diverse people support, all who pay taxes and should recieve representation for being citizens of hawaii. Believe me, I know the history of colonialism that exists on hawaii, though I do find it strange your assertion of asian settler colonialism when many peoples from china, japan, and korea were brought over as basically plantation indentured servitude.....Just because a small minority of even the proposed ethnic group in question protests, then all progress should stop? What if say these protestors supported removing all forms of electricity, or all cars on the island in the name of cultural history? Why then does this small group have so much power in your eyes over the people that actually live in the area, and not people who fly over from Oahu or the mainland who come protest. This also ignores the fact that there are already at least 12 telescopes on the top in a VERY small area of the overall mountain top. Their footprint is tiny.
It can be said that during the last 50 years probably every single erasure or attempt to erase indigenous culture/populations is supported, enabled, sponsored and driven by the (settler) state. When the majority populations then construe the ”indigenous problem” through the ”unfairness” of how native populations/minorities ”can wield such immense power”( - all while these minorities are overrepresented in just about every category of social and economic inequality and underrepresented in every corridor of power ) - then we can truly understand how still today indigenous populations are actively erased and silenced by those very populations who swear they abide to the tenets of social justice and liberal decree.
 

SolidSnakeBoy

Member
May 21, 2018
344
Of course not. That's why it's a hypothetical question. Would it be okay to build it there if it were? I don't think it would be.
As I understand it, this project was approved by all the local and state authorities. It would be like if the city of Jerusalem and Israeli government approved the construction. I still have not seen any data that shows that the majority of the population directly affected by this construction opposes it. Note that this population is also a diverse pool.
 

Helio

Member
Oct 28, 2017
8,232
As I understand it, this project was approved by all the local and state authorities. It would be like if the city of Jerusalem and Israeli government approved the construction. I still have not seen any data that shows that the majority of the population directly affected by this construction opposes it. Note that this population is also a diverse pool.
So of the government says yes, it’s fine to bulldoze it no matter the protestations? How do you feel about Israel razing buildings in Palestine?
 
Oct 25, 2017
2,199
Yes? The poster in question said that there are others ways to bring money into the island than the telescope(which is required to invest 1 billion in the local economy to build there), so i asked what would be some alternatives. The big island is heavily reliant on tourism, and that was messed with during the eruption which depressed the economy here.
We should do more to subsidize and stabilize the material conditions of the Native populations through taxation of the power elite while preserving what's left of their culture after decades of eradication as reparations.
 
Oct 27, 2017
4,151
Spain
Of course not. That's why it's a hypothetical question. Would it be okay to build it there if it were? I don't think it would be.
Go look at the surface of the Mauna Kea volcano, and at the surface of the Dome of the Rock.
Besides, the comparison is twice the funny given the Dome of the Rock is actually the site that is being invaded by a genocidal colonizer, while the Mauna Kea site is subject to all the judicial guarantees in the world, as proven by the countless delays the protesters have been causing, and the guarantees to their litigation. I'm sure if the Dome of the Rock were a perfect site for an observatory it would be bulldozed in no time, which has not been the case with this observatory.
 

SolidSnakeBoy

Member
May 21, 2018
344
So of the government says yes, it’s fine to bulldoze it no matter the protestations? How do you feel about Israel razing buildings in Palestine?
The building is being constructed in a location that is already off limits to the public, does not affect carrying out of rituals, plans to provide economic stimulus, and has plans to reduce the number of telescopes on the mountain. In your analogy, nothing is being razed, and infact more land is being returned for cultural preservation.
 

Dongs Macabre

Member
Oct 26, 2017
1,077
Of course not. That's why it's a hypothetical question. Would it be okay to build it there if it were? I don't think it would be.
Then whether it's "okay" is up to the locals and the people who hold it sacred to decide (note that in this hypothetical situation the "okayness" is not necessarily related to whether it'll happen or not). I personally wouldn't give a shit, because I have no attachment to there. Bulldoze over the fucking pyramids and the Notre Dame for all I care. I want the telescope to be built. That doesn't mean I get a say in the matter. What any of us feel is completely irrelevant unless we're the ones affected by it.
 
Oct 27, 2017
4,151
Spain
So of the government says yes, it’s fine to bulldoze it no matter the protestations? How do you feel about Israel razing buildings in Palestine?
Hawaii is a democratic state of the US, which is a democracy with an independent judiciary, and there have been plenty of guarantees to every party involved. It's not comparable to the situation of Jerusalem in the apartheid state of Israel, which all around makes for an ad-absurdum comparison.
 

Dyle

The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
8,061
Wisconsin
I understand the concerns and criticism, but this project has been through every level of local, state, and national scrutiny over the course of years and has been approved by everyone involved with concessions for the concerns of the locals. A project like that that successfully jumps through every hoop set in front of it and will have such a minor impact on a mountaintop already covered in similar structures shouldn't be a major point of concern. If the project were truly that destructive it would not have made it to this point

Of course that doesn't mean they shouldn't do more to compensate for the impact of the project in other ways. Most of the comparisons people have been posting in this thread make little sense and muddy the issue further than necessary
 

Thordinson

Member
Aug 1, 2018
1,362
Then whether it's "okay" is up to the locals and the people who hold it sacred to decide (note that in this hypothetical situation the "okayness" is not necessarily related to whether it'll happen or not). I personally wouldn't give a shit, because I have no attachment to there. Bulldoze over the fucking pyramids and the Notre Dame for all I care. I want the telescope to be built. That doesn't mean I get a say in the matter. What any of us feel is completely irrelevant unless we're the ones affected by it.
I agree. I don't get to decide either. Even if I didn't like it going through, it's not up to me nor should it be.
 

Blader

Member
Oct 27, 2017
9,721
I don't get how people are equating a telescope with say an oil pipeline or harmful experiments towards minorities. The telescope would be a net benefit to society and not harm the environment or any people in any meaningful way. There are already other telescopes on the mountain and many natives seem to be in favor of it.
This was raised earlier in the thread, but just the act of construction is not particularly environmentally friendly in and of itself. But we're also in a thread where some of the pushback is, "We don't need anymore telescopes" lol

He can't have been literally run over by a bulldozer
He was. Jason Momoa can't make Aquaman 2 because he is now dead.
 
Nov 1, 2017
102
DFW, Texas
That comparison is just nonsensical. Mauna Kea is a huge mountain, and it just so happens to be the best location in the whole northern hemisphere for astronomical observation. It wasn't chosen because some people deem it sacred, but because of the outstanding characteristics of the site.
i thought that nonsensical knee-jerk false equivalencies was what Era was all about -- i cancel your premise and I cancel you too :P (am i doing this right?)
 

Dyle

The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
8,061
Wisconsin
dakota access pipeline says what
There are way less protections for a pipeline like that than there is for a telescope like this. I'm not saying that nothing dangerous can ever be built anywhere ever, but in this case on this especially protected land that has been under extreme scrutiny for decades, comparing the two projects is the definition of apples to oranges. The reason things like DAPL happen is because they don't have the levels of protection and regulation that places like Mauna Kea have.
 

dhlt25

Member
Oct 27, 2017
326
People in Hawaii spend all their energy on the wrong thing. A small group of locals claiming sacred land was able to hold up something that has been scrutinized to hell and back and is actually supported by the majority. All the mean while we have the rail project in limbo due to incompetency, homeless everywhere, trash all over the aina and no one give a shit.
 

Xe4

Member
Oct 25, 2017
8,946
I actually made a thread about this topic a while back that didn't get much attention so I'm glad the popularity of Momoa and Aquaman is bringing more discussion to what I think is an important and complicated issue. To avoid reiterating what I have already posted, I'll just steal from my OP a while back:
This is an issue that I've followed somewhat, both as someone interested in astronomy, but also because it's definitely a case with no clear cut answer to me.

On one hand, Mauna Kea is easily one of the best sites to put a telescope in the world with numerous features that astronomers look for, including:
  • Low light pollution from the surrounding areas.
  • Low moisture and virtually no clouds due to being above the inversion layer:
  • High elevation at > 4,000 meters (>13,000 ft)
  • Low air turbulence leading to high astronomical "seeing"
The telescopes on Mauna Kea have allowed us unprecedented access to the grandeur of the universe, and projects such as the Thirty Meter Telescope will improve our knowledge and awe of the world even more.

However on the other side of things, I think it's important to be respectful of people's non-harmful beliefs and practices, which is a big deal with Mauna Kea being such a prominent area culturally to Native Hawaiians. This is especially true with the United States and other actors stealing Hawaii from the native populace in the early 20th century.

I'm not sure how much dialogue is going on between the astronomical community and Hawaiian cultural activists, but clearly there needs to be more. I'm certainly not a fan than the proposers of observatories pushing through the telescopes while removing ceremonial structures people spent their time and effort putting up, all while expecting the resistance of these projects to go away.

Perhaps there will be a way to allow the Native Hawaiians to continue their cultural practices while still allowing telescopes on the site, so that we can all enjoy the wonders of the universe.
I'd also be cautious about interpreting a singular poll as with regards to any issue, especially with the poll having a rather small sample size all things considered. However, it does lead me to believe there should be a tribal election on the issue, even if it's just a non-binding referendum. I have no idea the details of what it would take to organize such an election or how the balloting would be worded, but I think it's better than not asking for the general consensus of Native Hawaiian's regarding the issue.

I think it's a bit silly that both state and local permission is required for building the telescope but neither the government of Hawaii or the district tried to get the opinion of Native Hawaiians whom the project will be effecting the most. It could be that those protesting are indeed a vocal minority within the community or there could be significant resistance within Hawaiian groups to the project. The outcome of a referendum would go a long way in determining whether or not the project should go forward as planned and honestly it should've been done earlier before there was so much money invested in the location.
 

tiesto

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,421
Long Island, NY
The biggest complaint employers have about STEM majors is their lack of communication and teamwork skills.
I don't disagree, but at least back when I was in undergrad, STEM majors had to still take a variety of general ed humanities courses, and as a CS major, our capstone project was a semester-long team project. So I dunno how much humanities really 'helps', just that many people attracted to STEM tend to be of the lone wolf or introverted types who just want to sit behind a computer, or in a lab, doing their work with minimal disturbance.
 

JCHandsom

Avenger
Nov 3, 2017
3,960
I don't get how people are equating a telescope with say an oil pipeline or harmful experiments towards minorities. The telescope would be a net benefit to society and not harm the environment or any people in any meaningful way. There are already other telescopes on the mountain and many natives seem to be in favor of it.
Did you miss the post about the aquifer under the mountain and how construction could potentially contaminate it, due to the porous nature of the volcanic rock?

Also, while many Hawaiian Residents are in favor, actual Native Hawaiians are definitely raising their voices in opposition to this.

I oppose the TMT not because I don’t find Astronomy and Telescopes fucking dope (it is and they are) or that we somehow have enough (we don’t), I oppose it because the voices of a marginalized group of people are being ignored and their customs, beliefs, and traditions deserve the same respect and consideration as the ones valued by the majority. To those who would say “Fuck it, bulldoze Stonehenge for all I care, it’s all about science and stars and shit now!” I would contend you have a depressingly narrow view of human expression, human history, and human values if you can’t find worth in the past, particularly in the past of a different culture whose legacy could serve to expand our empathy and enrich our sense of who and what we are as a species.

Like, c’mon, there were 4 other sites, there is a compromise to be reached here y’all.
 

firehawk12

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,892
Stonehenge is the size of a farmhouse. Mauna Kea is a volcano. Weird comparison to make.
I think about it the other way - people were crying about the fact that Notre Dame was set on fire and raised millions to try to rebuild it. I assume to some people on Hawaii, this site has the same cultural and historical significance.
 

Rosebud

Member
Apr 16, 2018
4,454
When you think about it, the Tuskegee syphilis experiment was also science
And many other things (inquisition, slavery, wars, prejudice) were based of religion. Does it mean religions are awful, or that people use anything to justify their behavior?

I don't agree with forced constructions, but this "anti-science" stance is really weird.

How does learning about the distant universe help us come to terms with the legacy of colonialism and the need to combat climate change/install a more democratic, egalitarian society? What does the learning about a quark’s nature tell us about how we should orient out society’s values?

This is my problem with scientism. It tells us nothing about society and the human condition. Humanities > STEM.
Scientists are trying to combat climate change for years you know, but politics aren't collaborating.

And implying that scientists only cares about "quarks" and give a shit to humanity is really petty, the vast majority of researches are made to improve human life somehow. Eletronic implants are helping people to walk again, 100 years ago only a "miracle" could do that.
 
Last edited: