TMT - Contested Case Hearing Status - Hilo

[ohiagrrl]

Mind the gap, Oxford.

"South Sandwich Isles" (What the British called Hawaii Islands). "What are you daft?" "What are you on about?" "....a lorry full of kippers."

Certain nuances of idiomatic seem to be lost on both sides of this international conversation here on this local forum.

[MarkP]

quote:

---

Originally posted by ohiagrrl

Galileo,
Regarding Mr Ha's opinion, I would argue that in 1964, even if the Traditional Hawaiian Movement had gotten up as many numbers as it has today, there was no Internet, no Facebook, no email, etc...ie: it is not likely the majority of Traditional Hawaiians would have known about the construction or even been as connected to eachother, much less the outside world until after the structures were near completion. I some how doubt the previous observatories went door to door to inform natives.

---

The argument that Native Hawaiians have been practicing various cultural traditions UP ON THE MOUNTAIN since forever belies this. The ones that were up there that day to worship and got displaced by bulldozers would have had some comment. There apparently were no such people.

[HereOnThePrimalEdge]

I would argue that in 1964... there was no Internet, no Facebook, no email, etc...ie: it is not likely the majority of Traditional Hawaiians would have known about the construction or even been as connected to eachother

I was alive in the 1960's. In Hilo there was at least one newspaper with local news stories, as well as several AM radio stations which in the 1960's tended to focus almost entirely on local issues and events. Don't forget the coconut wireless. Public meetings were held over zoning and construction permits.

Word got around, perhaps not in the manner it does now, but if someone was interested in a specific event during that era, they could easily find out about it.

You could never convince a monkey to give you a banana by promising him limitless bananas after death in monkey heaven.

[ohiagrrl]

I am personally familiar with 1980's rural Hawaii where there were mostly Hawaiians and they just weren't organized in the way they are today. Some locals didn't even have radios, many were relegated to contact with direct family members only. Today, the tools are better, the numbers are up and there is concensus. The 1960's were arguably slower than the 1980's. There's no way to equate now and then in terms of personal media tools/devices or population numbers.

As far as what K-Joe stated about Hawaii not deserving the TMT project, maybe we don't. Maybe we deserve better.
If TMT loses this case and shoves off, is this the end of Next Generation Space Telescopes (NGST)? I think not. Previous telescopes leased the lands for $1 per annum and TMT was supposed to slide in to the same deal. After years of protests, the sum was upped to $1,000,000.00 yearly. Who is to say the next suitor wouldn't pay $1 million per acre of effected land? The space industry is already a kajillion dollar a year industry and we haven't even begun interstellar mining projects. I mean has anyone seen this R&D project just proposed by NASA?

https://phys.org/news/2017-03-nasa-magne...phere.html

This is one reason (among many) I would like to see an NGST in Hawaii but preferably with an organisation that isn't trying to start an internecine war by sowing seeds of division and spreading negative propaganda about Traditional Hawaiians. If the key to the future is as simple as respecting the past, that doesn't seem such a high price tag. Wake up proponents.

[HereOnThePrimalEdge]

spreading negative propaganda about Traditional Hawaiians

Such as?
Most negative comments I've read which I assume you might call negative propaganda (without a specific example), in fact point out incorrect, falsified, or fabricated information. You have written about Kealoha Pisciotta and her ahu several times. Try applying the same burden of proof to the location she choose for her ahu, as you have to the TMT EIS, and other site inspections. I would hazard a guess that the TMT site has had many times more effort put into it's investigation (which you repeatedly say falls short of an environmental or cultural examination standard, or burden of proof you personally would require), while you accept the word of Kealoha that the spot she chose for her ahu, hundreds of years after a previous ahu was abandoned, fell into disuse, or could not be maintained by the family... you are willing to accept that the spot Kealoha built on was historically accurate and correct. Based on what information? She doesn't know herself, and to say so is not negative propaganda.

You could never convince a monkey to give you a banana by promising him limitless bananas after death in monkey heaven.

[kalakoa]

there is concensus

No, there isn't.

[HereOnThePrimalEdge]

Kealoha Pisciotta and her ahu

Let's suggest another example.

It's a few years in the future. The Protector community has stopped all construction of everything above 9000 feet in elevation on Mauna Kea, except Native Hawaiian ahus. With social media Hawaiian families are able to easily gather together, drive truckloads of rocks up from the lowlands, build new ahus, and send photos to realatives on Facebook.

One day, Kealoha builds another ahu in a location of her choosing. Another Hawaiian family sees it and says - - wait a minute, that's the historical site of our ancient family shrine. Because the matriarch of the offended family has a shark for an amakua, she is unable to control her emotions and actions, and texts all the young men of the family to drive up the mountain to physically protect their territory, in a way even the police are unable to restrain. Watching the TMT hearings, you can see this is not too far fetched.

Now, how do you see this playing out? What burden of proof would you require between Hawaiian families to stake a claim for their ahu? Oral tradition? Physical remains from a previous ahu? What if none of that is available?

Of course this is just a hypothetical example, and it's the type of disagreement that could happen between two or more families anywhere in the world. But I think it's a good example of how the kind of proof you expect the TMT to provide, when applied equally might prevent anyone, even Hawaiians from building their family ahu on Mauna Kea.

You could never convince a monkey to give you a banana by promising him limitless bananas after death in monkey heaven.

[ohiagrrl]

Nice redirect. It seems you really don't want others to read my points or proof provided. I understand that the Traditional Hawaiian culture is puzzling and inconvenient for you and am wondering why you live here? Did I stumble on a workplace gripe session for University and Telescope employees or are there other people reading this forum?

[kalakoa]

are there other people reading this forum?

No, just sockpuppets. Nothing to see here, move along.

[PaulW]

There are many people reading this forum and I would guess very few are connected to the telescope or university.

Perceived slights towards Hawaiian culture aren't helped by having someone who claims to speak on their behalf stating that what they really want is just more money to be extorted out of the project. The injection of millions of dollars into the economy isn't enough, apparently.

I see you also want a slice of the royalties of the non-existent space mining industry. Don't get your hopes up.

A lot of people (e.g. gypsy) seem to have trouble understanding this so let me restate it: astronomy costs money, it does not make money. There is no huge pie for anyone to demand a share of.

Hawaii does deserve this telescope, but a tiny minority of the people sure don't.