In Precontact Hawaii, the Swift Birth of a Temple System--and a Religious State
Proto-historic Hawaiian temples on the island of Maui may have mushroomed up within just 30 years, not 250 as previously supposed, scientists say. The findings could significantly alter researchers' understanding of the pace of precontact sociopolitical change in the Pacific.
In the new work, Patrick V. Kirch and Warren D. Sharp of the University of California and Berkeley used another kind of radiometric technique involving thorium-230, rather than carbon-14, to date bits of branch coral that were collected from living reefs and left as divine offerings at seven different temples during construction. Dates for these corals, which had been incorporated into walls and platform fill, all fell in a narrow range of 1565 to 1638 A.D., give or take a few years on either end. Moreover, dates on the samples that best reflect the time they were harvested from the sea--those from the coral branch tips--ranged from 1608 to 1638 A.D., an interval of just 30 years. These findings thus point to intensive temple-building during that time.

 

Peaceful end for Maori head row
A dispute over human heads which were acquired by a Scottish adventurer is set to reach a peaceful conclusion - after almost 200 years.
Councillors in Perth are likely to agree on Wednesday to return the ancestral items to the Museum of New Zealand.
The tattooed heads, known as toi moko, are stored in Perth Museum.
But they are sacred to the Maori, who are demanding the return of the preserved remains.
They were sent to Scotland by adventurer David Ramsay, a Perth-born ship's surgeon, who settled in Australia in 1822 and set about collecting curios. "

 

A view of COP 10
The US - which pulled out of the Protocol in 2001, but remains a signatory to the Framework Convention - worked to scupper formal talks on the future of the climate regime. It took the position that, until more is known about the science of climate change and the efficacy of existing policies and measures, it is too soon to discuss post-2012 arrangements. It was supported by some developing countries - most notably China and India, whose rapid industrialisation is matched by fast-growing emissions, and the members of OPEC.
Nonetheless, the Argentine government proposed two 'Seminars of Governmental Experts' to meet in 2005, and report back to the next COP -a move initially opposed by the US and developing countries. The EU remains the most enthusiastic supporter of the Protocol and, under pressure from its industry, which fears competitive disadvantages if the bloc continues to move forward alone, is particularly keen to encourage post-2012 discussions.
After some wrangling, a compromise agreement was reached at the 11th hour to hold a seminar in May. However, its terms of reference are severely constrained.
The seminar is to "promote an informal exchange" of information on "actions relating to mitigation and adaptation", rather than provide guidance as such to the UNFCCC process. Crucially, it is to be conducted "without prejudices to any future negotiations, commitments, process, framework or mandate under the Convention and the Kyoto Protocol."
Green groups, unsurprisingly, slammed the deal, with Greenpeace accusing the US and Saudi Arabia of "deliberate tactics of obstruction and delay", which led to "a deal that barely keeps the process moving".
Indeed, those hoping for some continuity -a second commitment period, taking a form similar to the first phase of the Protocol- are likely to be disappointed. In one of many side events at the conference discussing the post-2012 landscape, a panel of eight climate change policy specialists and representatives of 'progressive' business were asked if they believed there was any possibility of a second commitment period that resembles the first, either with or without US participation. None did.

Wednesday, January 19, 2005