It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Community
General discussion (archive)Do you think Pluto should still be the ninth planet?(95 posts)(95 posts)
(95 posts)
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
This is my favourite topic
Posted November 11, 2012
What? Pluto is a planet? Does Mickey knows it?
Posted November 11, 2012
avatar
olanorig: What? Pluto is a planet? Does Mickey knows it?
Hell, know it? Mickey's a freakin' moon!
Posted November 11, 2012
avatar
Theta_Sigma: 's lost it's status due to the opinion of a minority rather bothersome.
Minority?

Majority decided whether pluto is a planet or not.


*very confused on what you are saying*
Posted November 11, 2012
avatar
Theta_Sigma: 's lost it's status due to the opinion of a minority rather bothersome.
avatar
lukaszthegreat: Minority?

Majority decided whether pluto is a planet or not.


*very confused on what you are saying*
I meant that in a "total human population" sense...I was purposely exaggerating to emphasize my point. Sorry for the confusion man.
Posted November 11, 2012
avatar
lukaszthegreat: Minority?

Majority decided whether pluto is a planet or not.


*very confused on what you are saying*
avatar
Theta_Sigma: I meant that in a "total human population" sense...I was purposely exaggerating to emphasize my point. Sorry for the confusion man.
but that is weird thing to say. people did not decide that pluto is a planet. they don't really have any right to decide whats planet or not.

therefore it was majority who decided that pluto is not a planet.


saying Pluto should be a planet is just silly. you are only saying that because scientists for years told you that Pluto is a planet. Now, with more data, with better understanding of the universe and of our solar system scientists tell you that it is actually a dwarf planet.
Why do you approve of the older more primitive definition and not newer better one? source of that definition is the same.

that really confuses me.
Posted November 11, 2012
avatar
hedwards: Personally, I'm much more outraged by the fact that we're not going to be allowed to call that latest addition Xena. Where's the outrage for that?
What !?! No planet Xena???

Now I'm pissed!!!
Attachments:
xena_gabrielle.jpg (45 Kb)
Posted November 11, 2012
avatar
hedwards: Personally, I'm much more outraged by the fact that we're not going to be allowed to call that latest addition Xena. Where's the outrage for that?
avatar
Alfie3000: What !?! No planet Xena???

Now I'm pissed!!!
ditto. that angered me too. the fuck they were thinking?

*Planning to conquer the planet and call it xena and the hell with everyone else!!*
Posted November 12, 2012
avatar
Theta_Sigma: I meant that in a "total human population" sense...I was purposely exaggerating to emphasize my point. Sorry for the confusion man.
avatar
lukaszthegreat: but that is weird thing to say. people did not decide that pluto is a planet. they don't really have any right to decide whats planet or not.

therefore it was majority who decided that pluto is not a planet.


saying Pluto should be a planet is just silly. you are only saying that because scientists for years told you that Pluto is a planet. Now, with more data, with better understanding of the universe and of our solar system scientists tell you that it is actually a dwarf planet.
Why do you approve of the older more primitive definition and not newer better one? source of that definition is the same.

that really confuses me.
This is pretty much why I had initially intended to avoid voicing my opinion about this subject but for clarification purposes here are your answers.

Actually for starters, that is kind of part of my point, (as I have previously stated in other posts), it's all a matter of opinion. To me Pluto will always be a planet, and I think it's only right to restore it's previous status. It still isn't a majority when it's only the opinions of a few deciding what is to be thought by the whole. I realize this is usually how it works, but it doesn't make it right, either.

You have every right to think that way, and while I think your opinion about that is complete bullshit I accept your right to believe that, and speaking said opinion in a civilized manner. My point is newer, isn't always better, take for example how medical science has gone from certain foods being good...then bad...then good for you again. Many of said studies on the subject come from the same place as well. Sometimes the old ways are the best ways, not always but sometimes.

If tomorrow they said, you, yourself, is no longer considered a person, as such you are forbidden from having any status as a person. You lose everything previously afforded to you by being a person; credit cards, bank accounts, driver's license, your mortgage, etc... all stripped from you. Would you deem that right, or would you think it silly to still wish to be considered a person. My point if it looks like a duck, and sounds like a duck, what is it? A duck.

I realize that this example has a few things such as the fact you're talking about a person vs. an object that may or may not be considered "alive" (and I say this based on your previous point of changing information, not necessarily that it would likely happen), but my point is purely the root argument only.

I do not make the argument for Pluto because it is what I was taught, so much as, I do it because it is what I actually believe, despite what another group thinks I should believe. Again, as I stated previously, if it looks like a duck, and it sounds like a duck, what is it? A duck.

That all being said, you are still entitled to believe as you wish, I'm not trying to change anyone's opinions, just voicing mine.
Posted November 12, 2012
I propose new planet names, named after modern celebrities, instead of those old and crusty Roman ones.
Attachments:
celebrity_solar.png (425 Kb)
Posted November 12, 2012
If Pluto is no longer a planet, then what did My Very Educated Mother Just Send Us Nine of? The solar system no longer makes any sense.
Posted November 12, 2012
avatar
Theta_Sigma: -snip-
It's only right to restore the status of the sun as orbiting the Earth.
It's only right to restore the status of the Earth as flat.
It's only right to restore the status of the sun as Apollo riding a chariot.

By your own logic, Pluto shouldn't even be a planet in the first place since we should restore the status of the solar system to having no planets as we once believed. So yeah, it's not based on "beliefs", it's just that we have a better understanding of astronomy and you disagree out of... nostalgia I guess?

This isn't something that is right or wrong depending on whether you agree or disagree with it. I mean, you can believe that all dwarf planets should just be known as planets, or you can consider Pluto a planet in your own head, but saying it should be "rightfully restored" is a dangerous and short sighted way of looking at the world with blinders on and saying science should be based on popular pressure, not objective research.

Also your metaphor is really stupid, because Pluto doesn't give a shit about its mortgage. The point of classifying planets in the first place is to make collaboration and discoveries easier to share, not to give human rights to a chunk of rock. In my opinion, comparing the two is borderline offensive.
Post edited November 12, 2012 by PenutBrittle
Posted November 12, 2012
avatar
Marzooker: I know it's classified as a dwarf planet, but it seems very unnecessary to change the way we look at the solar system.
This change is far from arbitrary. It doesn't only change the way we look at the solar system. The implications for how we look at the entire universe is affected by this change.

But more importantly, there are *many* bodies in the vicinity of Pluto that are of similar size, some even bigger. Should we call all of them planets as well? If Pluto remains a planet, we have to include Ceres. Creating a more rigid definition of a planet actually serves to decrease complexity as we discover more and more about the solar system.
Posted November 12, 2012
As I said before I know personally several astronomers which took part in IAU meeting that set a new definition of planet. And you know what they said? They were pretty sure that there would be a lot of controversies about it but they also knew that those quarrels would last for limited time only. Namely it would stop when everybody who had been taught that Pluto was a planet died... Kids born after 2006 will not have any problems with Pluto... For them it will be a dwarf plane, just as it will have been their whole live
Posted November 12, 2012
avatar
PenutBrittle: ...
I agree with everything you said, but I just have to point this out: it's a myth that anyone ever actually thought the Earth was flat. Thousands of years BC, and people were pretty accurately working out the size of the planet as a sphere. The idea that people used to think the Earth was flat is a relatively recent invention by anti-science Christian groups who felt that science was stomping all over their territory a little too happily, and basically tried deny absolutely anything that may be deemed "scientific". There were murmurings of it around 500AD by Church leaders who tried to distance their belief system from the pagan Greeks, but the solid belief that everyone (including Columbus) thought the Earth was flat was only really invented and popularised within the last 120 years or so.

But as for the sun-orbiting-Earth idea, sadly it seems many idiots do still believe that - though I think that's more general ignorance than a steadfastly held opinion despite all evidence (at least outside of the Bible belt of the US...) as seen in some comments about peoples' ignorance earlier in this thread. For an extra example, my friend's sister once asked me "Does the Earth spin around, or does the moon orbit it?" as if it's only one of the two possibilities. And this quote from a Yahoo Answers expert: "The earth rotates around the sun everyday".

"Currently some 20% of the U.S. population believe that the sun goes around the Earth, while a further 9% claimed not to know. Polls conducted by Gallup in the 1990s found that 16% of Germans, 18% of Americans and 19% of Britons hold that the Sun revolves around the Earth. A study done in 2005 by Dr. Jon D. Miller of Northwestern University found that about 20% of American adults thinks the Sun revolves around the Earth. According to 2011 VTSIOM poll, 32% of Russians agree that the Sun revolves around the Earth."
Post edited November 12, 2012 by Export
Posted November 12, 2012
avatar
Alfie3000: I propose new planet names, named after modern celebrities, instead of those old and crusty Roman ones.
I propose we name the planets after GOG users.
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
This is my favourite topic
Community
General discussion (archive)Do you think Pluto should still be the ninth planet?(95 posts)(95 posts)
(95 posts)