I have an astronomer friend who spends each working night in front of a bank of computers at a giant telescope station. His job is to seek out and track astroids. My friend has himself discovered some 500 unique objects hurling through space. He even gets to name them.
My friend is iconic: the quintessential atheist. A scientist with the privelege of applying his knowledge to potentially save the planet, he is privy to the facts of life. He was a deadhead in college so, he also fancies himself fully read-in on every alternative form of new age mumbo-jumbo there is. To my friend, beliefs dwell in the Medieval past, and those who have them cling to a bygone fantasy world-view in which unicorns are real, GMOs are evil, and homeopathy works. My friend has no beliefs; he has only facts.
Professional astromomers are truly a flock of odd birds. On the one hand, you have uber-rational atheists like my friend. On the other, you have the prestigious Vatican Obervatory. Half the astronomers are looking for hard facts and astroids, the other half are looking for God in the stars...
In many ways, astronomy is conducted like a charity. A significant amount of support for the astronomy profession comes from private -- and public -- donations. The equipment and brain-power are expensive, and the end result yields no widgets for sale. There's almost nothing money-making about it. Time and time again we see NASA with its budget of what-ifs, coming before Congress like Oliver clutching his empty bowl and asking "Please, Sir, can I have some more?"
The fact astronomy is both a religious quest and an atheist's dream job seems to work in the profession's favor when it comes to acquiring resources. Fundraisers can appeal to a wide spectrum of supporters: those who seek answers about the origins of the universe; those who see this work as a matter of national security; those looking to spot celestial horsemen with divine trumpets. One assumes with players like the Vatican Bank involved, private donors of any ilk are generally high-rolling ultra-rich visionaries, possibly hoping to get on the A-list for a ticket to Mars.
And yet -- there's an academic side to astronomy which brings its potential pool of rock-star donors into the public realm. The state university system is among the key players, which means tuition dollars and tax dollars -- and public lands -- are among the pieces of this puzzle in the astronomical budgets spent searching for the meaning of life or the end thereof. Per usual, where public resources are involved, you'll find your packs of what some, like my atheist friend, see as ill-informed and unwashed nay-sayers who think they have a clue about what's really important in life, clutching their pitchforks and ready to set Galileo's pyre aflame yet again. Sigh. The profession repeatedly finds itself in a battle over world-class sky-views that happen to be located on sacred lands.
The atheist-meets-catachism astronomy profession argues both sides in settling this conflict. When the Vatican Observatory, The University of Arizona, and the Max Plank Institute teamed up to build the Mt Graham International Observatory, the lead astronomer and fundraising rainmaker for the project publicly pondered whether "extraterrestrials might be brought within the fold and baptized."
One would need to put some questions to him [the alien], such as: ‘Have you ever experienced something similar to Adam and Eve, in other words, original sin? Do you people also know a Jesus who has redeemed you?'
Apparently, his pitch worked. In spite of broken treaty agreements with the local San Carlos Apaches, and using lands in the heart of a National Forest, the project was completed and is currently counting and tracking hard rocks hurling through space, and listening for trumpets.
Now, in the latest episode of star search, just as University of Hawai'i has finally got a full bowl of gruel from kindly deep-pocketed patrons and is ready to fix broken equipment and to construct a shiny new mega-lens on public lands it leases from the state for $1 a year, this time it's the atheists who are out in force to battle the new age anti-science activists -- namely, native Hawai'ians -- who consider the site to be sacred land.
Mauna Kea is profoundly significant in Hawaiian culture and religion, representing the zenith of the Native Hawaiian people’s ancestral ties to Creation itself. The upper regions of Mauna Kea reside in Wao Akua (realm of the Akua-Creator) and the summit is considered to be the temple of the Supreme Being in many oral histories throughout Polynesia, which pre-date modern science by millennia. Mauna Kea is also the head waters for the island of Hawai‘i. Modern Native Hawaiians continue to regard Mauna Kea with reverence and perform many cultural and religious practices there.
Not all of the protesters can claim ancestral heritage in regard to this land. But because the facility is established on public lands through a contract between the state of Hawai'i and its state university, the movement garners a diverse faction of public, tax-paying support by and for native Hawai'ians and their position as described at a
petition site to save Mauna Kea:
We urge you to act in the spirit of ALOHA, in accordance with the laws of the State of Hawaiʻi and international standards protecting indigenous peoples, the environment, and Mother Earth, to take expedient action in this matter.
Truly respecting the host culture of this land means respecting the sacred places that that culture has held in reverence for millennia. Doing so lays a good foundation for genuine healing of the longstanding historic wrongs that continue to affect the well-being of everyone in Hawaiʻi. You have an opportunity to begin a great healing process right now, and to turn the future of Hawai'i toward one that is truly pono.
We urge you to take this opportunity, for all of Hawaiʻi and the world.
My atheist friend the astronmer doesn't believe in the truly pono. He's posted several articles on his facebook page about the controversy over
sacred lands of Mauna Kea and the Thrity Meter Telescope. His like-minded friends leave comments describing cultural survival activists as "sincere and well-meaning dupes" with "such a misrepresented view of the past."
"Oh, geeze. Not again," my friend quips in his status, posting yet another link about "the crazies" who think the adjective "sacred" has meaning that applies to the third stone from the sun in some "touchy-feely" way.
This isn’t just a science versus superstition debate. It’s a question of clinging to knowledge of the past versus learning about the future in a way that enhances our connection to the world. We have the possibility of learning more about how we came to be as a result of this telescope, and that potential knowledge is being undercut by those who aren’t willing to make any sacrifices for it because it might upset those who are no longer with us [a.k.a., the ancestral native tradition]...
This mountain is one of the few locations in the world where the telescope can be built and superstitious beliefs about its significance shouldn’t stand in the way of such a monumental feat of science and technology.
The writer is clearly not Hawai'ian. These are native Hawai'ians living TODAY, who want to protect the land NOW.
Or is it already too late? The Mauna Kea observatories are relatively new (several large telescopes are already located and in operation there... my friend wonders, what's the difference in building
one more?). They may be new, yet they are reminiscent, clearly and proudly, of empire and the Hawai'ian islands' colonization:
“It will afford me unfeigned satisfaction if my kingdom can add its quota toward the successful accomplishment of the most important astronomical observation of the present century and assist, however humbly, the enlightened nations of the earth in these costly enterprises…” ~ King Kalākaua, September 1874
as quoted in the Pacific Commercial Advertiser, upon arrival of a British expedition of astronomers to Hawaii
Reason reigns supreme (
Rule, Britania! Britania rule the waves...).
It does seem reasonable to assume, however, that King Kalakaua in his wildest imagination never dreamed a massive scientific-industrial park would be built high in Mauna Kea.
What's the difference in building one more fountain of knowledge and potential earth-saving telescope? How much damage is done in swallowing up just a few more acres of public land? How much would one new construction project among sixteen standing facilities further desecrate the Wao Akua, realm of the Akua-Creator?
I can't answer those questions. But in light of Earth Day, I ask us all to ponder an alternate set of questions: Is there no place in our nation, in our world and world-view, for the cultural survival of indigenous people? If not in Hawai'i, where can native Hawai'ians practice their religion and live by their local, ancestral traditions? Is this not protected by the First Amendment? or by Clinton's RFRA? or by international accord? And since these are public lands, is that not reason enough to limit the leasing of real estate and permanent development, whether the site is deemed to be of natural or cultural heritage? Aren't 16 structures with repairs and upgrades state-of-the-art enough? Is this really just a question of misguided new age values, or is it inherently human, all over the world, for local people to revere and protect the land?
Is nothing sacred?