Scientific progress held hostage by religious fanatics

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by aaronvan, Apr 30, 2015.

  1. aaronvan Suspended

    aaronvan

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2011
    Location:
    República Cascadia
    #1
    In this case, it's native Hawaiians protesting construction of the Thirty-Meter Telescope because apparently Mauna Kea is the home of their sacred mountain gods. Again, someone is forcing their religion on the rest of us. I really don't like that. Do you?

    http://www.skyandtelescope.com/astronomy-news/more-discord-over-thirty-meter-telescope-043020151/

    http://www.tmt.org

    Outrageous that science is being held hostage by myth and superstition.

    Here is the anti-telescope view:

    https://sacredmaunakea.wordpress.co...aiian-mountain-from-physicsworld-com-4202015/

    (I apologize in advance for not starting another Baltimore riot thread. :p)
     

    Attached Files:

  2. citizenzen macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #2
    It's in the hands of the courts.

    I'm content to let them decide.
     
  3. caesarp macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2012
    #3
    It's been going on forever. Galileo to stem cells. Religion poisons everything.
     
  4. dec. Suspended

    dec.

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2012
    Location:
    Toronto
    #4
    And before you know it those crazy Hawaiian mythologists will expect that their "religion" should be imposed on everyone else and affect topics like "same-sex marriage" and SCOTUS decisions...
     
  5. steve knight Suspended

    steve knight

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    #5
    so that goes wit the oil pipeline going through native american land science says oil is good so lets take their land.
     
  6. DonJudgeMe macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2014
    Location:
    Arizona
    #6
    It's sacred land.

    Find another spot.

    Just because their beliefs don't aline with yours, does not give you a right to destroy their holy land.

    I am not a fan of religion, but I respect others' beliefs.
     
  7. APlotdevice macrumors 68040

    APlotdevice

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2011
    #7
    I'm not sure how I feel about this personally. Though I'm pretty sure if it was a Church in the way, conservative media would spend days covering the protest, declaring it an attack on Christianity.
     
  8. Renzatic Suspended

    Renzatic

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2011
    Location:
    Gramps, what the hell am I paying you for?
    #8
    How do they know the volcano god doesn't want a telescope?
     
  9. A.Goldberg macrumors 68000

    A.Goldberg

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2015
    Location:
    Boston
    #9
    If it's already identified and preserved as Holy Land then I would say build elsewhere. I suppose my question is why is the land part of a conservation? Because of the nature or because of the history and local culture?
    Clearly the way this is written implies that construction can only not physically and environmentally affect the area in a substantial manner. It does not reference history or culture, but perhaps that was the true intention of of the conservation in the first place but got slapped with a boiler-plate conservation clause. I'd be curious to know.

    While it's easy to downplay the situation because of the arbitrary nature of religion, to me it seems not different than stopping construction for any other arbitrary reason- cutting down a few trees, changing the nature of the landscape, destroying a historic building, etc to build a Wal-Mart. So what? A building is old? Why does that mean you can't knock it down?

    I'm not going to pretend I know the first thing about telescopes or why this specific site was finally chosen versus others from a scientific standpoint, but it seems to me there might be other mountains out there without this conflict of interest. While I am a strong supporter of science, astronomy is something I personally don't find as beneficial to humanity as other fields of science. Not to say astronomy isn't important, but given a hypothetical choice to spend money to on exploring the universe or curing disease, I'd pick the latter. Given the choice between altering sacred ground and building elsewhere, I'd build elsewhere. Given the choice between researching stem cells and not infuriating some the ultra religious, I would pick researching stem cells.

    It will be interesting to see. On the one hand a small minority is concerned about the holy land. Another group is probably concerned with improving the economics of the area (though I'm not sure how an astrology lab would help employ a substantial number of poor, uneducated residents - again, I know nothing of telescopes and observatories). And another group is obviously concerned with the scientific opportunity and progress. I suspect some people, despite the low ecological impact, are still against the construction for the sake of maiming the landscape. They might end up siding with the indigenous people.

    And that leads me to the last issue- imperialism. In some ways I feel the indigenous people do have a right to maybe a little bit of their land. We did start to annex Hawaii to exploit the sugar economy (finalized with the Spanish-American War, due to the strategic position). The majority of natives at the time did not support the annexation.
     
  10. Sydde macrumors 68020

    Sydde

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    #10
    Wait, Mauna Kea already has two telescopes, why are the suddenly averse to a third one?
     
  11. aaronvan, May 1, 2015
    Last edited: May 1, 2015

    aaronvan thread starter Suspended

    aaronvan

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2011
    Location:
    República Cascadia
    #11
    Because Mauna Kea is home to 13 telescopes and not one casino.
     
  12. noodlemanc macrumors regular

    noodlemanc

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2010
    Location:
    Australasia
  13. Sydde macrumors 68020

    Sydde

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    #13
    550 acres on the mountain are reserved for this sort of thing (where they plan to do it). So, UofHI, probably.
     
  14. TexanMan05 macrumors regular

    TexanMan05

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2008
    #14
    Exactly. If you own it, do you want on it.
     
  15. aaronvan thread starter Suspended

    aaronvan

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2011
    Location:
    República Cascadia
    #15
    The Mauna Kea Science Reserve is owned by the state of Hawai'i, who leases part of it to the Mauna Kea Observatories, which itself is managed by the University of Hawai'i.
     
  16. tunerX Suspended

    tunerX

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2009
    #16
    I see it as the exact opposite. Religion is protected by the US constitution. They have their rights, and they should be respected.

    In the USA you cannot just take what you want and violate constitutional rights. I am an atheist, as I have said many times before... but you cannot just make people live by your beliefs. Whether you have religion or you don't, you cannot force your beliefs on others.

    You on the other hand state that religion is holding "hostage" an idea that you prefer. You make it seem that all religious people are terrorists who will hold hostage something that you do not agree with. They are not "holding hostage", they are expressing their constitutional rights.

    Disgusting...
     
  17. Dranix macrumors 6502a

    Dranix

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2011
    Location:
    Gelnhausen, Germany
    #17
    Well religious people are by definition mentally ill. Believing in invisible, omnipotent beings that listen and speak to them and whose existence nobody can prove - clearly a delusion: A delusion is a belief held with strong conviction despite superior evidence to the contrary.
     
  18. tunerX Suspended

    tunerX

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2009
    #18
    No they are not. They have a faith protected by the constitution. Whether I believe what they believe does not grant me right to negate them of their rights or beliefs.

    I googled the definition of delusion...an idiosyncratic belief or impression that is firmly maintained despite being contradicted by what is generally accepted as reality or rational argument, typically a symptom of mental disorder.

    You can disagree... Generally is arguable. But hey... If you want to take every person in America who believes in a god and toss them in an asylum... good luck with that.
     
  19. noodlemanc macrumors regular

    noodlemanc

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2010
    Location:
    Australasia
    #19
    Seems like it will go ahead then, one way or another.
     
  20. Dranix macrumors 6502a

    Dranix

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2011
    Location:
    Gelnhausen, Germany
    #20
    Well considering how the US behaves internationally - I'm sure the US is a single big asylum. And the lunatics are handling the military equipment, too :)
     
  21. aaronvan thread starter Suspended

    aaronvan

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2011
    Location:
    República Cascadia
    #21

    It will. These pseudoreligious cranks and grifters will fail and science will triumphantly peer deep into the universe from its Mauna Kea redoubt.
     
  22. A.Goldberg, May 1, 2015
    Last edited: May 1, 2015

    A.Goldberg macrumors 68000

    A.Goldberg

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2015
    Location:
    Boston
    #22
    Religion is a delusion by the definition of delusion. Religion is not a delusion by the pathological/psychiatric definition of delusion.

    If you want to be scientific about your approach, let's pull out the DSM-5 definition:
    Presently 4/5ths of the population would otherwise be mentally ill and man therefore would have been mentally ill since essentially the beginning of mankind. (That suggests it's human nature to believe in something greater than oneself and explain existence)

    ----------

    Coming form a German :p

    Speaking of which the Germans use the ICD-10 likely rather than the DSM. I don't have a current ICD, but I have an older version that states a delusion is-
     
  23. Dranix macrumors 6502a

    Dranix

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2011
    Location:
    Gelnhausen, Germany
    #23
    And you don't see the logical problem in both definitions? They both contain the exception for religion to avoid naming what would otherwise be clear: That believing in a god is delusional.

    What on the other hand is surprising me is how open especially very religious christians are to killing and torture, both against the very foundation of the teachings of Jesus.
     
  24. caesarp macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2012
    #24
    "sacred land". What a joke. Its land. There's no such thing as "sacred", other than entirely subjective beliefs.

    ----------

    They have a right to observe and practice their religion on their own property or in their house of worhship. Not make artificial constructs to put restrictions on land use where the land is owned by all of the people of the state, not just these religious adherents.

    Just about every populated place on earth probably has bones of some ancestors somewhere on it, if you dug back far enough. Should we declare all land sacred everywhere and never build anything again, because my mythical superstition makes some land allegedly "sacred"? That's absurd.

    ----------

    You have to define "god". When you really talk to people, deep down, it eventually comes out they most people don't actually believe there is a daddy in the sky controlling things and listening to people's prayers. Rather, a lot of people are vaguely "spiritual" and admit they don't understand entirely how the universe works, so they default to the term "god" to explain the gaps or holes in knowledge.

    So if you send around a poll and ask people: "do you believe in god" While you might get a lot of "yes" answers, without a definition of "god", the poll is essentially meaningless.

    Some people define god as the natural forces of the universe.

    Also, people are afraid NOT to believe in god, because of what was hammered into their heads as kids, and because they fear what others in their family; school; church; town; or society as a whole will think.

    But I agree, that those who think their is a god controlling what happens on earth on a day to day basis (and deciding who wins football games) and listening to them or others who worship it or offer prayers, are generally delusional. Should they be tossed in an asylum? No. Its not their fault that they were brainwashed as kids or subject to societal peer pressure on the issue.
     
  25. DonJudgeMe macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2014
    Location:
    Arizona
    #25
    Well, then I suppose all theoretical physicists are delusional and mentally ill(until they solve their problem).... or any scientists, for that matter. Why are we building crazy people telescopes?
     

Share This Page