Instructions:
Your final draft of Essay Two is due by 11:55 pm on Sunday, 4/9. For a complete description of the essay (including specific guidelines and requirements), please review the guidelines. Your draft should be typed, follow appropriate MLA guidelines, include in-text citations and a Works Cited page, and be submitted as a .doc or .docx file.
Please also remember that your draft should be a minimum of 6-8 full, double-spaced pages (min. 1500 words). The page count/word count does not include the Works Cited page.
Before you submit your draft please be sure that you have done the following:
Proofread for grammar and spelling errors;
Checked your formatting;
Checked that you have met the guidelines;
Checked that you have a Works Cited page and that your source(s) are properly cited;
If your draft does not include a Works Cited page, it will not be accepted. I will also be checking for plagiarism, including the use of AI software, so be sure to properly cite your sources and properly represent the ideas that you borrow from others. For more on the consequences of plagiarism, please see the syllabus.
A rubric for this assignment can be found here:
Presenting the Issue – important/relevant information about the issue is presented, including the current relevance of the issue and why it’s a serious concern/why the audience should care about it. Research is cited.
Comments:
Asserting the Position – position is clear and consistent. Position is asserted throughout, including in MP and CA paragraphs.
Comments:
Supporting the Position – points are appropriate and believable. Credible evidence is integrated properly and supports the claims. Research is cited.
Comments:
Responding to Likely Objections – 2-3 likely and relevant objections are responded to. Responses are consistent with position and reasoning, and evidence is used to support the responses. CR strategy is used. Research is cited.
Comments:
Logically Organizing the Argument and Credibility – structure is logical and consistent. Contains all necessary parts. Credibility is established and maintained throughout.
Comments:
Formatting/guidelines – document is properly formatted. A Works Cited page is included and properly formatted. All sources appear on the Works Cited page. In-text citations are used. Min. page count met.
Comments:
*************************Attached is Draft 2 of Essay Two***********************
Cencheal P. Maxilom
Prof. D. Carreira Ching
English 100
29 Mar 2023
Mauna Kea and the Thirty Meter Telescope: A Controversial Issue
Question on Area of Concern: What is your perspective on the controversy surrounding . he construction of the Thirty Meter Telescope on Mauna Kea? How do you think it can be resolved in a way that considers scientific progress and cultural preservation?
Mauna Kea is a dormant volcano located on the Big Island of Hawaii. It is the highest peak in Hawaii, rising to an elevation of 13,803 feet (4,207 meters) above sea level. Mauna Kea is considered a sacred site by many Native Hawaiians and is home to numerous endangered plant and animal species. The mountain is also a popular destination for astronomers drawn to the high altitude and clear skies for observing the stars and galaxies. The proposed Thirty Meter Telescope has been a controversial issue surrounding Mauna Kea in recent years. However, many benefits come with the installation of the TMT. The TMT on Mauna Kea will help scientists understand how the Universe was created. For example, astronomers can view the faintest objects and understand the evolution of stars and galaxies better. They will be able to study the birth of stars. This proposed astronomical observatory will enable us to foresee the future of our Universe and identify signs of life beyond our solar system. Additionally, the construction and operation of the TMT would provide job opportunities for the local community and stimulate the economy during the building phase and in ongoing maintenance and operation. However, opponents argue that the TMT would cause significant environmental damage and disrespect the cultural significance of Mauna Kea. Whether to build the TMT on Mauna Kea remains a contentious issue that requires careful consideration of both the potential benefits and impacts.
Mauna Kea’s History and Cultural Importance:
The project has faced opposition from some members of the local Hawaiian community, who have argued that the construction of the telescope would be disrespectful to the sacred nature of Mauna Kea. This is because the mountain has been a sacred site to the Hawaiian people for centuries. Many Native Hawaiians believe that Mauna Kea is the home of the gods and where their ancestors ascended to the heavens (Sanders and Jerry Nelson 4). For this reason, they consider the mountain to be a deeply spiritual and culturally significant place. Some would see the construction of the TMT on Mauna Kea as a further encroachment on Hawaiian sovereignty and a disregard for the concerns and opinions of the local community. For many years, the Hawaiian people have fought to keep Mauna Kea from being built. In the 1960s, the University of Hawaii began leasing land from the state of Hawaii to construct astronomical observatories (Sanders and Jerry Nelson 5). Over time, the installation of multiple observatories atop the mountain has significantly impacted the surrounding landscape and the Hawaiian people’s cultural and spiritual beliefs.
The opposition to the TMT has also brought to light broader issues of colonialism and cultural erasure in Hawaii. Furthermore, opponents argue that the TMT would represent a continuation of the historical injustices suffered by the Hawaiian people, who have faced colonization and the loss of their land and culture for centuries. The construction of the TMT would be seen as a further encroachment on Hawaiian sovereignty and a disregard for the concerns and opinions of the local community. Some see the construction of the TMT as yet another example of the Hawaiian people being denied control over their land and culture. The opposition to the TMT has therefore become a rallying point for Native Hawaiians and their allies who are fighting to protect their sovereignty and cultural heritage.
Environmental Issues:
The proposed installation of the Thirty Meter Telescope (TMT) on Mauna Kea has raised concerns among environmentalists and indigenous communities about the project’s potential impact on the mountain’s fragile ecosystem. Several environmental issues are associated with the TMT installation. The TMT installation would necessitate clearing a large area of land to construct the telescope and its facilities. This would lead to the destruction of native vegetation and the displacement of wildlife, including some endangered species (Hamacher et al., p2).
The construction of the TMT could also impact the groundwater resources on Mauna Kea, which are important water sources for the surrounding communities. Using chemicals and materials in the construction and operation of the telescope could also contaminate the water supply. The TMT would generate a significant amount of light pollution, which could adversely affect the ecosystem of Mauna Kea. The bright lights from the observatory could disrupt the behavior and migration patterns of nocturnal animals and insects.
Ethical and Legal Issues
The Thirty Meter Telescope (TMT) project on Mauna Kea, a dormant volcano in Hawaii, has raised legal and ethical concerns. The Hawaiian people have spoken out against the construction of the TMT on their sacred lands, claiming that it violates their cultural beliefs. The controversy surrounding the TMT’s development on Mauna Kea is exacerbated by the fact that the area where it is proposed to be built is considered public land. Still, many Hawaiians consider it stolen property that should be returned to them (Hamacher et al., p3). Furthermore, the construction of the TMT on Mauna Kea calls into question the principle of free, prior, and informed consent. Indigenous peoples have the right to be consulted and consent before any development occurs on their land (Herhold 3). The construction of the TMT on Mauna Kea has been criticized for violating this principle because indigenous Hawaiians were not adequately consulted before construction began. Many Hawaiians regard Mauna Kea as a spiritual and ancestral site, and the TMT’s construction on the mountain has been interpreted as disregarding their cultural traditions and faith. As a result, protests against the TMT’s Mauna Kea development have been ongoing since 2014, and tensions have risen. To sum it up, the development of Mauna Kea raises significant legal and ethical issues. While the benefits of the TMT’s construction are significant, these concerns must be addressed and resolved through meaningful consultation and dialogue with the Hawaiian community.
Alternate Locations for TMT:
The proposed Thirty Meter Telescope (TMT) on Mauna Kea in Hawaii has been met with opposition from the local community, who claim that building the observatory on their sacred land is disrespectful. However, other potential TMT locations, such as the Canary Islands in Spain, could be suitable alternatives. As a location for the TMT, the Canary Islands offer several advantages. The islands provide similar to Mauna Kea optimal atmospheric conditions for astronomical observations. They are an excellent option due to their location in the Atlantic Ocean, away from pollution sources, and their high altitude, which minimizes atmospheric interference (Kahanamoku et al., 2). On the island of La Palma, where the TMT could be built, is the Roque de los Muchachos Observatory, a renowned astronomical facility.
The Canary Islands, unlike Mauna Kea, have no cultural or spiritual significance for any indigenous communities, so there would be no conflict over land use (Kahanamoku et al., 3). Furthermore, because the Canary Islands’ ecosystem is not as fragile as Mauna Kea’s, the potential environmental impact of building the TMT would be significantly reduced. Furthermore, the construction of the TMT would benefit the local economy by creating jobs and capital. The Canary Islands is already a popular tourist destination, and the TMT would bring in more science and astronomy enthusiasts. Building the TMT on the Canary Islands may have some drawbacks despite its benefits. The islands already house several telescopes and observatories, so the existing astronomical facilities may not have enough resources or space to accommodate the TMT. Furthermore, because the Canary Islands have less atmospheric interference, the TMT may be less effective at detecting cosmic signatures (Kahanamoku et al., 3). Finally, obtaining funding for the TMT’s construction on the islands may necessitate a substantial investment.
Counterarguments:
Some advocate for the Thirty Meter Telescope’s construction on Mauna Kea, citing the economic benefits it could bring to the local community. They argue that the TMT would attract scientists and researchers worldwide. This will therefore create jobs and drive economic development in the region. However, the economic benefits of the TMT must be weighed against its potential environmental and cultural impacts. The construction of the TMT on Mauna Kea could cause significant harm to culturally important sites on the mountain. This will therefore have a long-term detrimental effect on the Hawaiian people’s cultural heritage. Furthermore, it is unlikely that the economic benefits of the TMT would be equally distributed throughout the local community, with construction companies and scientists potentially receiving a more significant economic impact (Witze 3).
It’s also worth noting that Hawaii’s economy relies heavily on tourism based on its scenic beauty and rich cultural heritage. The construction of the TMT could harm Hawaii’s reputation as a tourist destination and negatively impact the economy. As a result, the economic case for the TMT must be carefully balanced against its construction’s environmental, cultural, and community impacts. It is critical to consider alternative solutions that respect the mountain’s cultural and environmental significance while allowing for scientific research and development rather than pursuing the construction of the TMT (Witze 3). It is not an option to ignore the long-term negative effects on Hawaii’s tourism industry and cultural heritage. Therefore, it is crucial to find a solution that balances the benefits of scientific development with the protection of cultural heritage and the environment.
Conclusion
In conclusion, whether the Thirty Meter Telescope should be built on Mauna Kea is a complex and divisive issue. While the project has many scientific and economic benefits, some people argue that the construction will amount to the degradation of the mountain’s environmental surroundings. This area also holds a significant cultural value to the locals. It is, therefore, important that before any construction of such magnitude, the people should be consulted as to how they feel. This is because they are the ones who will be directly affected. The TMT could be built on alternative location sites such as the Canary Islands. This is because there would still be the same scientific benefits in such an area but without the potential harm to the environment and cultural heritage. However, moving the project to another location is not simple, as it involves significant financial and logistical challenges. Any decision about the TMT’s location must weigh the project’s scientific and economic benefits against the environmental and cultural concerns raised by opponents. In making this decision, it is critical to consider the perspectives of all stakeholders, including indigenous Hawaiian communities, environmental activists, and scientists. The most promising way forward is for all parties to continue engaging in open and respectful dialogue and explore alternative solutions to meet the TMT’s scientific and economic objectives while minimizing its potential environmental and cultural impacts.
Changes made
The final draft of the essay has undergone several changes to improve the overall quality and readability of the text. The changes I made included more information about the Mauna Kea. For example, in the first draft, I wrote, “Mauna Kea is the tallest peak in Hawaii, with an altitude of 4,207 meters above sea level”. While in the second draft, I made it to “Mauna Kea is a dormant volcano located on the Big Island of Hawaii. It is the highest peak in Hawaii, rising to an elevation of 13,803 feet (4,207 meters) above sea level”. This change was to enable the readers to get a better understanding of the issue at hand. At the same time, the basic facts about Mauna kea are controversial, and it is, therefore, important to provide both sides of the story.
The next significant change I made was grammar corrections. For example, the first draft of the essay had a lot of punctuation and grammar mistakes. There were also many awkward phrases and clauses which had to be edited. I am confident that the corrections I have made improve the flow of the text and its readability. The overall content of my essay remains unchanged, as I have tried to be as objective as possible. In addition, I have provided both sides of the story and information about the emotions experienced in Hawaii. I also thought about how to make my words more concise and articulate. The changes made in the essay are minor, but they are essential in achieving a better-quality essay.
