Dr. Holly Winton has published a thought-provoking piece in The Conversation of 16 July (Winton, 2025). Evidently, Dr. Winton wishes to see intertwining of traditional knowledge with modern global science. My reaction to her piece is that it discusses some appealing traditional ideas about nature, but over-promises on what traditional knowledge can deliver in the world of today. Here I quote from her article and give my reactions.
Quotes and Reactions
“Antarctica’s patterns of stark seasonal changes, with months of darkness followed by a summer of 24-hour daylight, prompted us to explore how a Māori lunar and environmental calendar (Maramataka) might apply to the continent and help us recognise changes as the climate continues to warm.”
The distance between the southernmost point of New Zealand to the very closest edge of Antarctica is about 2,600 km. Today, the exact flying distance from Christchurch to Scott Base is 3,920 kilometers. At approximately 14.2 million square kilometers, Antarctica embodies 40% greater area than Europe and twice the area of Australia. How well could any traditional lunar calendar, evolved centuries ago in the islands of New Zealand, apply to that vast, freezing continent, or point out environmental change that science cannot already perceive?
Other limitations of lunar calendars have already been discussed extensively (e.g. Mayoral et al., 2019; Bartholemew, 2025). Lillis and Jones (2025) summarize some of the available evidence and report that, for example, the lunar cycle exerts no discernible influence on plant growth and physiology and therefore has no effect on the cultivation of crops. Unfortunately, a traditional lunar calendar will not help in any way to understand climate change.
“The flowering of pohutukawa is a land sign (tohu o te whenua), the rising of Rehua (Antares, the brightest star in the constellation Scorpius) is an atmospheric sign (tohu o te rangi), and sea urchins (kina) are a sea sign (tohu o te moana).”
Though we see little science here, nevertheless these traditional “signs” may have a place in the world of today if they engender care for our environments. However, what these signs signify is not clear to me.
“When these signs align, it signals balance in nature and the right time to gather food. But if they are out of sync (such as early flowering or small kina), it means something in the environment (te taiao) is out of balance.”
I realise that here we have traditional lore, but has it been established scientifically that when these signs align, nature is truly in balance and it is really the right time to gather food? If not in alignment, would it be prudent to wait until alignment before gathering food? How exactly do they align? By coinciding in time? What does it mean to be out of balance?
“These tohu remind us how deeply land, sea and sky are connected, and why careful observation matters.”
Agreed! And most probably every scientist would agree that the land, sea and sky are connected, physically, chemically, climatically and in terms of the health and vitality of living things. Many or most traditional belief systems embrace this valuable conception too. I imagine that all practicing scientists would also agree that careful observation matters. Further, they would say that we need more than careful observation. We need experiment and verification as well.
Clearly, traditional knowledge shares with science both observation and application, and both trial and error but, strictly speaking, not falsification. Here, if a theory is to be considered science, it must be capable of being tested, predict an outcome and perhaps be shown to be false; a perspective advanced by Karl Popper (Popper, 1959). Thus, through development and refinement of their knowledge, engaging in trial and error and systematic observation, early communities gained profound understanding of their environments, but did not engage in science to the extent of robust verification of their ideas.
“While the tohu in Antarctica were vastly different from those observed in Aotearoa, the energy phases of the Maramataka Moon cycles aligned with traditional stories (pūrākau) describing snow and ice.”
I admit that I do not understand the notion of “energy phases” of the lunar cycle, nor how they align with traditional stories that describe snow and ice. Is there in fact a connection between the lunar cycle and snow and ice? I believe not.
“In te ao Māori, snow has a genealogy (whakapapa) that connects it to wider systems of life and knowledge. Snow is part of a continuum that begins in Ranginui (the sky father) and moves through the god (atua) of weather Tāwhirimātea, who shapes the form and movement of clouds, winds, rain and snow. Each type of snow carries its own name, qualities and behaviour, reflecting its journey through the skies and land.”
Here we have a charming allegory. Of course, we can teach it to children, along with similar allegories from other populations in New Zealand, but not literally nor as science. Of course, science also has names for various types of snow, each characterized by particular formation and texture. These types include powder snow, packed snow, corn snow, crud, slush and ice.
“The existence of the specific terms (kupu) for different forms of snow and ice reflect generations of observation, passed down through whakapapa and oral histories (kōrero tuku iho).”
Indeed, traditional or Indigenous communities passed knowledge and beliefs drawn from observation by means of word of mouth. Science passes knowledge through journals, books and databases.
“Our first observations of tohu in Antarctica mark the initial step towards intertwining the ancient knowledge system of mātauranga Māori with modern scientific exploration.”
I imagine that traditional knowledge here and there can add value that is complementary to science but in a very limited way. However, I am unsure of what it means to intertwine any ancient knowledge or belief system with modern global science. Another word that is used in this context here in New Zealand is to “weave”, but this word still does not help me. In any case, if we have an initial step, then we take it that there is much more to come. Should other countries similarly weave their own traditional knowledges with modern global science?
What about the knowledge or belief systems of other traditional communities such as those who live even closer to the Antarctic than New Zealanders; for example, the native peoples of Argentina? They include the Aonikenk, Kolla, Qom, Wichí, Diaguita, Mocoví, Huarpes, Mapuche and Guarani (Wikipedia, 2025). In fact, both Argentina and Chile are closer to the Antarctic than New Zealand. How do the traditional beliefs of the native peoples of those countries square up with New Zealand’s traditional knowledge?
“Observing snow through traditional practices provided insights into processes that cannot be fully understood through Western science methods alone.”
Dr. Winton provides no examples of processes or understanding, acquired by early communities from observation, that cannot be understood through “Western science” alone. Possibly they exist, but I cannot think of any. Further - what is Western science?
“Drawing on our field observations and past and present knowledge of environmental calendars found in mātauranga Māori and palaeo-climate data such as ice cores, we can begin to connect different knowledge systems in Antarctica.”
Beyond modern global science and New Zealand’s traditional knowledge, what are these different knowledge systems in Antarctica? How can we connect them and what is gained if we succeed in connecting them? How well does knowledge from ancient environmental calendars align with that sourced from ice cores?
“The knowledge of Maramataka has developed over millennia. Conceptualising this for Antarctica opens a way of using Māori methods and frameworks to glean new insights about the continent and ocean.”
Traditional methods and frameworks may provide new insights in terms of values and ethics and loving our world, and Asian, Pacific, Islamic, African, native American, Western and other traditions also encompass such insights. Most probably, traditional methods and frameworks provide little that is new to science beyond values, ethics and morals, and very little about continents and oceans beyond claims to ownership.
“Grounded in te ao Māori understanding that everything is connected, this approach invites us to see the polar environment not as a remote but a living system of interwoven tohu, rhythms and relationships.”
Agreed! And science also sees the world’s environments as interwoven rhythms and relationships. The systems approaches of world science offer rigorous, testable constructs for understanding patterns, relationships and connections. Most probably, the knowledge and belief systems of other traditional communities, including the Inuit of Greenland and the Arctic and sub-Arctic regions of North America, and those from Argentina and Chile that may have a bearing on the polar environment, embrace similar conceptions.
Comment
All traditional or Indigenous populations needed to understand seasonal changes in climate and how those changes affected the resources that were necessary for food and shelter. Such knowledge was necessary to survive. Could the traditional knowledge of the Inuit potentially provide a more fruitful source of insight into polar environments than the traditional knowledge of New Zealand?
Ideas that are cherry-picked from traditional or Indigenous knowledge may or may not lack rigor. The more important issue is whether they add to what we know already. Were people previously unaware that Weddell seals arrived at Scott Base at the height of summer, or unaware of how their migrations relate to their ecology? "Connecting different knowledge systems in Antarctica" may be an interesting anthropological project, but it remains unclear how it could add to our scientific understanding.
Modern science evolved rapidly during and after the Enlightenment, a movement that became prominent in Europe during the eighteenth century. The Enlightenment advocated the notion that reason should be the primary source of authority and legitimacy, and promoted liberty, constitutional government and separation of church and state. Great importance was placed on empirical knowledge and scientific method; specifically, knowledge that can be verified through experiment, statistical or mathematical evaluation or other methods of science.
Today, tests of scientific truth are very diverse, including verification, falsification, observation, experiment and comparison of models, which can range from informal notions of consistency-with-evidence, up to comparison of statistical models. Theory becomes particularly powerful when it demonstrates both explanatory and predictive power. Unfortunately, traditional knowledge, while of historic, cultural, social and religious interest and embracing many positive qualities, offers little in explanatory or predictive power.
A Warning for Science and Education
The authority of science in the world of today was, of course, hard won through the philosophical explorations and the subsequent scientific advances made by refining principles of empiricism and falsifiability. However, Mario Bunge voices a stark warning:
“Over the past three decades or so very many universities have been infiltrated, though not yet seized, by the enemies of learning, rigor, and empirical evidence: those who proclaim that there is no objective truth, whence “anything goes,” those who pass off political opinion as science and engage in bogus scholarship. These are not unorthodox original thinkers; they ignore or even scorn rigorous thinking and experimenting altogether.” (Bunge, 2006).
To be clear - I do not see Dr. Winton as an enemy of rigor or engaging in bogus scholarship, and I hear that she is a credible scientist. I see where she is coming from in her article. I understand that it may be intended to support the idea that traditional beliefs of centuries ago may offer complementary and sometimes equally valid explanations and predictive power to global science or that traditional knowledge goes further than science in embracing ethics and morality and in instructing how to live. However, given that such beliefs are not derived through the standards of the scientific method and often rely on mythology, I have fears that the public stands to be misled, perhaps not by Dr. Winton, but certainly by others.
Being misled could be especially serious where we hear of traditional medicine promoted as a viable alternative to modern global medicine (see Parvez and Rishi, 2019 and Tyson, 2023). An extreme example of where false ideas about traditional medicine can take us was evident in the very unfortunate death of a Wellington teenager (Stuff, 2010).
I have further concerns about the use of public money in supporting lightweight work of limited reach when New Zealand’s spend on research and development as a percentage of GDP (1.47%) lags far behind the OECD average (3.02%), high income nations (2.94%), Europe (2.24%), middle income nations (2.08%) and even behind the average for low to middle income nations, at 1.94% (World Bank, 2025 and Visual Capitalist, 2025).
Resources to science and technology are scarce by world standards and we must ensure prudent investment that is likely to achieve returns to the people, the economy and the environment of New Zealand and, of course, to the enrichment of the human capital that is so crucial to the future of this country. Of course, we should invest in research that pertains to minorities, their wellbeing and their world views, but our primary focus must at all times be placed firmly on benefit to the nation as a whole.
Let us preserve and value traditional beliefs but not confuse them with modern world science. We owe it to future generations to get this very critical matter right.
Dr David Lillis trained in physics and mathematics at Victoria University and Curtin University in Perth, working as a teacher, researcher, statistician and lecturer for most of his career. He has published many articles and scientific papers, as well as a book on graphing and statistics.
References
Bartholemew, Rob (2025). The Science of the Māori Lunar Calendar
https://aotearoabooks.co.nz/the-science-of-the-maori-lunar-calendar/
Bunge, Mario (2006). In praise of intolerance to charlatanism in academia.
December 2006 Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 775(1):96 – 115
DOI:10.1111/j.1749-6632.1996.tb23131.x
Lillis, David and Jones, Brian (2025). Indigenous Calendars in the Twenty-first Century?
https://breakingviewsnz.blogspot.com/2025/04/dr-david-lillis-and-professor-brian.html
Mayoral, O., Solbes, J., Cantó, J. and Pina, C. (2020). What Has Been Thought and Taught on the Lunar Influence on Plants in Agriculture? Perspective from Physics and Biology. Agronomy 2020,10, 955; doi:10.3390/agronomy10070955
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/342648175_What_Has_Been_Thought_and_Taught_on_the_Lunar_Influence_on_Plants_in_Agriculture_Perspective_from_Physics_and_Biology
Popper, K. (1959). The Logic of Scientific Discovery (2002 pbk; 2005 ebook ed.). Routledge. ISBN 978-0-415-27844-7.
Parvez. M. K. and Rishi, V. (2019). HerbDrug Interactions and Hepatotoxicity. Curr. Drug Metab. 20: 275–82.
https://www.eurekaselect.com/article/97525
Stuff (2010). Janet Moses died from 'accidental drowning'
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/4018457/Janet-Moses-died-from-accidental-drowning
Tyson, Jessica (2023). Therapeutic Products Bill: ‘Crown has no place in regulating rongoā’ says expert. New Zealand Herald. 9 May 2023.
Visual Capitalist (2025). Ranked: Countries Investing the Most in R&D
https://www.visualcapitalist.com/rd-investment-by-country/
Wikipedia (2025). Indigenous peoples in Argentina
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indigenous_peoples_in_Argentina
Winton, Holly (2025). We travelled to Antarctica to see if a Māori lunar calendar might help track environmental change
https://theconversation.com/we-travelled-to-antarctica-to-see-if-a-maori-lunar-calendar-might-help-track-environmental-change-239583
World Bank (2025). Research and Development Expenditure (% of GDP).
https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/GB.XPD.RSDV.GD.ZS
5 comments:
NZ's RDI investment % - it is already a third world country.
But regarding investment in cultural issues, it might be in top place.
Have these academics learned nothing? Animism and nature study are not science, and wrapping spiritual mumbo-jumbo in tortured language won't make it so. Why do we spend money on attempts to regress rather than support science and technology projects that actually advance this country's wellbeing? An excellent summary David but politicians need to read it, just as much as those of us who can see the sense of what you say.
David seems to miss the point completely. The reason people, like Dr Winton, push for the inclusion and study of traditional folk lore is because it is so different from science. There is no wrong answer, there is no need to show anything like results. You just claim vast amounts of money to prove nothing.
It is hard to blame Dr Winton and her friends from wanting to shove their snouts deep in the taxpayers money trough. Money for nothing, and degrees are free, to paraphrase Dire Straits.
David, you do see where this pseudo-scientific mish mash of B.S. is going don't you? It is laying the "academic" authority for an attempt by Maori activists to lay claim to the Antarctic. A notorious lightweight paper by another female Maori so-called academic claimed that Maori sailed to Antarctica and in the same paper stated that, because a single part-Maori sailor was on a European ship that visited Antarctica in the early 1900's, Maori had a claim to co-govern the entire Antarctic continent.
"Weaving", "pillars", metaphor confused with fact, how can these so-called academics put forward this B.S. with a straight face. And what does it say about N.Z. universities that they grant these ideologically motivated idiots advanced degrees?
Re: CHX above, the Dire Straits song actually goes "money for nothing and chicks for free" although with a little tweaking of the voice we can make that "cheques for free" which might be more appropriate.
Post a Comment