This is interesting, but what we all really want to know is if they've made and discoveries elucidating the financial borrowing habits of the aforementioned sea monsters.

Yeah, actually that was the motivation. The varieties of local importance are somewhat unique, and pretty minor on the global scale. Consequently, methods which minimize the amount of genetic change are desirable, because just like how a seeding of a Pinot noir and some other grape is not the same as the actual Pinot Noir, a hybrid between a poi taro like the Maui Lehua variety and a Chinese one like Bun Long will have the unique properties of the Hawaiian parent damaged. Is there something otherwise that you wish to imply? I'm sure you'll have proof of your statements if you do.

That happened a few years ago here with the genetically engineered taro disaster. Basically, university researchers wanted to insert a disease resistance gene into taro, a historically very important Hawaiian crop, so that the unique Hawaiian varieties could be preserved without having to hybridize them with other varieties. People flipped out, saying that changing the taro is offensive because it is sacred. Of course, no one told the ancient Hawaiian that, because if these people knew the history of the crop, they would have known that Hawaiians have been selecting somatic mutants for centuries, which lead to the diversity present in Hawai'i. But they invoked the sacred and offensive cards, and not enough people called them out on their bullshit rhetoric for exactly the reason you mentioned. The research was banned, as for the taro the activists claimed to care so much about, yields are in decline and fairly little is being done to really promote it.

I work in plant science in Hawai'i, had it is hard for me to miss the similarities between the two situations. I don't want the same thing that happened to my field to happen to the astronomers. It's my understanding than ancient Hawaiians would go up Mauna Kea to look at the stars. Now the same thing is bad? No, it is just people playing political games and using the cheapest identity politics tricks they can find. As far as I can tell, if the ancient Hawaiians were alive today, they would be all for it. Unfortunately, this is all very political, so history, science, and facts don't matter one bit to the loudest of the activist groups.

And don't misunderstand me, I fully understand and recognize the cultural aspects of the Mauna and the natural beauty that all people can recognize, as do the astronomers behind the project. The anti-TMT people are just taking things way too far.

If you ever make it the the Visitor's center on the Big Island halfway up Mauna Kea, they have some relatively fancy computer controlled telescopes for the public to look through. I was just there a few weeks ago, and you could see the clouds of Jupiter through one of them. If you're ever in the Hilo area, that's really a great thing to go to. The IFA is very good and active with their outreach. As for the observatories, those are not so easy to use, and there are waiting lists for astronomers to use them, so I don't think they're going to see any public use anytime soon.

But you know, if you don't speak up, they win. I work in plant science on O'ahu, and if you live in Maui, you know how controversial that one is. If we don't want laws passed against research, we have to speak up, because the activist groups certainty have no problem with making noise.

I want to point out here that the opposition is a vocal minority; there are a lot of Native Hawaiians who support the observatory. I don't live on the Big Island myself, but from talking to people who know a lot more on the topic than I do, it is my understanding that most Native Hawaiians are in support of the TMT. Most people in the Hilo area support the TMT, and recognize that it will being in economic, cultural, and educational benefits, as well as prestige and international recognition. It is the extremists who are protesting.

I can see where you are coming from though, and lets face it, there is a not insignificant segment of the Hawaiian community that really does seem to have some problems with the extreme anti-progress lot, especially with the Hawaiian independence activists who will stir up shit at any opportunity. These people build themselves around and value one thing and one thing only: being Hawaiian. That's it. How many cultures in history find success after getting so caught up in their own culture that they stop doing anything else? Not many. And yet, that is exactly the path these protestors want to take.

There is a great opportunity here for astronomy research, but do they want Hawai'i known for astronomy? Nope, just 'culture'. There is ongoing controversy about biotechnology here, with genetically engineered taro (University of Hawai'i developed, before anyone invokes that conspiracy) being banned previously for 'religious reasons' by exactly the same people now protesting the observatory. Do they want Hawai'i know for biotech? Nope, just 'culture'. And as you mentioned, there was the geothermal issue. Do they want that? Nope, just 'culture'. Every time, it is the same people protesting. It's like they want to kick out as much important things, things that actually matter and have social, educational, and economic value, until the islands are left with nothing...nothing but them of course.

The thing to remember is that the independence activists like to kick up a big fuss about anything they can to draw attention to themselves. And they don't care what the long term effects are. They don't care about a thriving Hawai'i...oh they say they do but their actions say otherwise. What they care about is bringing power and influence to themselves, and they find plenty of useful idiots along the way, both angry Hawaiians who have been told that all their problem are the fault of the US and they would be so much better under a new monarchy as well as hippie dipshits so overcome by white guilt that they bafflingly enough think a reestablishment of a race based Hawaiian Kingdom where they would be essentially second class citizens would, somehow, be a good thing. There is, as you see everywhere else, politics underlining anti-science, and in this case pretty nasty politics at that.

Personally, I'd be on the first plane to the mainland in the unlikely event any of these assholes ever got any real power. Their beliefs are simply unacceptable.

To my knowledge, they have and there is public information available on the environmental impact statement. This work is being done by astronomers who really do care. I've seen far to many people act as if this is some big mean corporation who just wants to profit at the cost of the environment or something. I've met these people, they are scientists, who value the environment and respecting culture. And if that were the main problem, the activists should hit those issues specifically instead of calling for the scrapping of the whole thing, and also, if that were the main issue, we wouldn't have prominent activists wanting a removal of all telescopes. It doesn't surprise or convince me when people who call for the TMT stopped on every conceivable ground also call for it to be stopped on environmental ones.

This is the most likely reason. You see a lot of the same people protesting this as you see against a lot of other things (like geothermal power, biotechnology, tourism, ect.). They don't care what they protest, as long as they make some noise to draw attention to their cause of re-establishing the Hawaiian monarchy...with themselves as the new kings no doubt...and recreating the Hawaiian kingdom for people with Hawaiian blood. That, of course, is an inherently racist proposition. And I've snooped around those independence rallies before; I've seen these Hawaiian community leaders and independence activists play the race card in manners that, quite frankly, I think are unacceptable in an enlightened society.

They're people who live in the past, and play identity politics and pointless localism to enrich themselves by giving people something to hate on, no matter the cost (really, no different than you see in the South with those 'The Confederate States will rise again!' assholes). Of course, the Hawaiian nationalists don't care if this place goes to shit after they do as much damage as possible to achieve their goals, as long as they're the kings of shit mountain, and tough luck for everyone else, including no doubt their supporters who would then be in a much worse off position without the US and all the economic drivers the nationalists would like to see gone. It's really sad that anyone gives these assholes the time of day.

I can't tell if you're trolling or not but enough people do believe that keeping people impoverished and hungry is somehow good for them, and that it is somehow ethical to sit idly by and watch and do nothing while people starve just for being born in the wrong part of the planet. It's completely idiotic of course. Everywhere we see a reduction in poverty and increases in the standard of living we see lower birthrates. Do you really think we are going to bring about a greater human development index without first addressing the issues of starvation and malnutrition? Unlikely. Normal Borlaug once correctly remarked that the first essential component of social justice is adequate food for all mankind. You want to fight poverty, start by ensuring that no one goes to bed hungry. It's pretty hard to work your way to economic prosperity when you're dying of vitamin A deficiency.

Well, while he is wrong about climate change, his stance on Golden Rice is pretty well on. We know it works, we know it is safe, Greenpeace still opposes it because they know damned well that their cries of genetic engineering being a dangerous horrible thing that you should totally give them loads of cash to fight are going to look a bit silly when it is saving the lives of thousands of children. It's despicable that they are willing to allow unnecessary death and human suffering in developing countries just to further their careers as professional activists. They're no different than anti-vaxxers who bring back vaccine preventable disease, not in my book. I don't agree with Moore's stance on climate change, but at least he's doing good on this front to bring attention to the harm Greenpeace and other anti-science groups are doing.

Here's some feedback: can we please go back to referring to programs as programs?

I usually just point to the widespread European opposition to genetically engineered crops for that one. At least our creationists aren't opposing lifesaving technology and actively destroying scientific research. As a plant scientist, I have to say I view Europe as a fairly hostile place for science. Europeans have absolutely no room to act as if Americans are the only ones with the problem of opposition to science when that sort of attitude is so prevalent in their own backyard.

That's like saying that people who eat healthy can get heart problems, so a diet of greasy cheeseburgers is fine. That problems in one instance were not man made does not indicate that present ones are similarly not man made, nor is it a compelling case against a given course of action.

That's not at all the point of Golden Rice. It is supposed to act as a way to improve the nutritional quality of rice for those who cannot afford anything else, not be a luxury food.

Golden Rice doesn't have a set yield. The idea is to breed it into locally adapted varieties so that they retain virtually all of the same genes, but produce the extra nutrition.

So one is saying trust Monsanto (or Syngenta or Pioneer or any of the other seed companies that always get neglected for some reason). I am, however, saying the evidence is overwhelming that genetically engineered crops are safe and effective (and yes, contrary to the conspiracy theories claiming that Monsanto somehow owns the concept of genetic engineering, this includes research that has nothing to do with corporations) and that genetic engineering has been thoroughly demonstrated to be a useful tool for crop improvement. Those are two totally different statements; don't pretend otherwise.

Why can't they work for free you mean? I can think of a few reasons.

You know, if you really want more GE crops that are free to use besides the ones going off patent, and I for one sure do, then you should demand that the scientifically unjustified over-regulation of GE crops be reworked to facilitate more publicly funded GE crops. Thus far, only one university developed GE crop has been released: the Rainbow papaya, developed by the University of Hawai'i. There is also Bt eggplant in Bangladesh which is non-corporate. There's plenty of research, but no ability to bring it to the market anymore thanks to over regulation. There's something very wrong when university research cannot be used and only corporations can overcome the regulatory hurdles.

The Bt gene is a 'poison making gene' in the same sense that grapes are poison berries; just because a thing harms one organism (in the case of Bt, lepidopterans and coleopterans and in the case of grapes dogs) does not mean it hurts you. The Bt toxin is very well understood; to imply it is dangerous to humans is simply dishonest.