So some arbitrary group of busy-body intellectuals with wayyyyyyyyy too
much time on their hands has decided that Pluto is no longer a planet.
Why did anyone think that a definitive planetary definition had to be
resolved?
The general public are still scratching their heads over this
particular issue. Seems to me that Pluto was discovered in 1930 & has
been known as the 9th planet ever since. To change it now because a few
astronomers says it must makes no sense.
Mark Earnest - 28 Aug 2006 01:26 GMT
> So some arbitrary group of busy-body intellectuals with wayyyyyyyyy too
> much time on their hands has decided that Pluto is no longer a planet.
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> been known as the 9th planet ever since. To change it now because a few
> astronomers says it must makes no sense.
I agree. Pluto is holy.
Keep the 9th planet.
Michael Baldwin, Bruce - 30 Aug 2006 05:06 GMT
> > So some arbitrary group of busy-body intellectuals with wayyyyyyyyy too
> > much time on their hands has decided that Pluto is no longer a planet.
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> I agree. Pluto is holy.
> Keep the 9th planet.
What about Uranus?
beavith - 30 Aug 2006 04:06 GMT
>So some arbitrary group of busy-body intellectuals with wayyyyyyyyy too
>much time on their hands has decided that Pluto is no longer a planet.
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>been known as the 9th planet ever since. To change it now because a few
>astronomers says it must makes no sense.
read a history book. Ceres juno pallas and vesta were planets for
almost 50 years.
when hundreds of asteroids were being discovered, it became obvious in
teh 1850's, that they weren't planets and that you'd need a bookkeeper
to keep an accounting.
same with the TNOs and KBOs. pluto was just the first.
this outcome was a sure thing when they discovered the first big KBOs
in the 1990s
>