Should mountaintops be developed?

@oralloy,

oralloy wrote:

Having just one or two large telescopes for the entire world would limit the number of observations that we could make. There is a lot of science to be done.

But as it happens, three existing telescopes are being demolished to make way for this new one.

https://www.nature.com/news/hawaii-prunes-mauna-kea-telescope-hub-1.17688
http://www.hawaii.edu/news/2015/10/21/third-maunakea-observatory-set-for-decommissioning/

If they're building it in the spot left empty by an existing telescope, why is anyone complaining about sacred land?

1 Reply

@livinglava,

I'm not sure of the exact positioning. They may not be locating it in the exact position of the telescopes that are being withdrawn. Or maybe they are. Not sure.

But three older telescopes are being withdrawn regardless of the positioning of the new one.

As for why people are complaining, I have no idea. Some people oppose progress.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

oralloy wrote:

I'm not sure of the exact positioning. They may not be locating it in the exact position of the telescopes that are being withdrawn. Or maybe they are. Not sure.

Well, that makes a big difference. If there is already a telescope or other building there currently, it makes it easier to justify building a new building at that site.

That is part of the reason it is important to protect pristine areas; i.e. because once you establish a precedent of development there, it will be that much more difficult to keep it pristine.

Quote:

But three older telescopes are being withdrawn regardless of the positioning of the new one.

That doesn't justify building a new one in a new spot. The people complaining were claiming the site has ancient sacred value. Even if you demolish your old buildings, you shouldn't go on building new ones on sacred virgin ground. That's like going around putting graffiti on natural monuments and then legitimating it by saying graffiti is being removed on other natural monuments.

Quote:

As for why people are complaining, I have no idea. Some people oppose progress.

Telescopes are not progress, they are tools. Progress would be finding a way to honor the interest of protecting and preserving natural land by devising new ways of studying the deep universe without developing mountains.

1 Reply

@livinglava,

livinglava wrote:

Telescopes are not progress, they are tools.

We progress when scientists use the telescopes to learn.

livinglava wrote:

Progress would be finding a way to honor the interest of protecting and preserving natural land by devising new ways of studying the deep universe without developing mountains.

There are no other ways to do these studies.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

oralloy wrote:

livinglava wrote:
Telescopes are not progress, they are tools.

We progress when scientists use the telescopes to learn.

livinglava wrote:
Progress would be finding a way to honor the interest of protecting and preserving natural land by devising new ways of studying the deep universe without developing mountains.

There are no other ways to do these studies.

You cannot honestly believe that astronomy and astrophysics research require so many telescopes on top of so many different mountains.

You are just making excuses because you dislike people who want to protect nature against development; the way some sexual active people resent and scoff at virgins and celibate people.

You need to appreciate the ethic of protecting precious land, especially mountain tops, which are relatively rare spots; and accept that you should minimize human impacts, even when you can justify the impact by science, progress, or whatever.

1 Reply

@livinglava,

The Thirty Meter Telescope is only one telescope on one mountain, and it will be doing science that no other telescope can do. Three other telescopes are being withdrawn from the mountain at the same time that this one is being built.

Not very many mountains have large telescopes on them.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

oralloy wrote:

The Thirty Meter Telescope is only one telescope on one mountain, and it will be doing science that no other telescope can do. Three other telescopes are being withdrawn from the mountain at the same time that this one is being built.

That doesn't justify it. If it gets built, it should be on the exact same cleared ground that some other telescope is removed from. It is not right to keep building on different sites, even if they are all on the same mountain.

What do you think is going to happen with the other sites where older telescopes are being removed? Probably redeveloped as some other building(s). Once undeveloped land gets developed, it's very difficult to return it to a natural state.

Even if it wasn't difficult, though, it is better to leave pristine land pristine. Being able to visit an area where there is continuity of forest life is important, whether you think of it in terms of being 'sacred' or whether you think of it in terms of observing the natural evolution of unaltered ecosystem.

I don't think you have enough respect for undeveloped land.

0 Replies

Should mountaintops be developed?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know