Pluto's Demotion - Page 2

Pichu_XP · 03-25-2007, 08:51 PM

But!

The standards that they settled on to demote the thing is poorly thought up.

Though, I can't really think of anything better myself...

GuidoHunter · 03-25-2007, 11:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pichu_XP

But!

The standards that they settled on to demote the thing is poorly thought up.

Though, I can't really think of anything ebtter myself...

Go reread what jewpin said.

You'll forgive me for not taking the word of a random teenager over the collective mind of the world's most prominent astronomers on what should be considered a planet.

--Guido

http://andy.mikee385.com

Magnum13 · 03-26-2007, 12:13 AM

pluto's a planet, always has been, end of story, goodbye.

tsugomaru · 03-26-2007, 12:26 AM

The definition of a planet was a highly debated topic by top astronomers. No one is going to take your word above theirs, especially when you present no proof magnum. -.-

~Tsugomaru

jewpinthethird · 03-26-2007, 12:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Magnum13

pluto's a planet, always has been, end of story, goodbye.

Earth's flat too.

**FishFishRevolution** · 03-26-2007, 07:26 AM

Wait how can you have an opinion on something that's just been defined? It's a fact, not an opinion.

Afrobean · 03-26-2007, 07:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vivi57

then Pluto isn't even big enough to have moons orbit around it.

What?

A moon is just a natural satelite. It could be the size of a Volkswagen Beetle and it'd still be a moon. In fact, Pluto has two other smaller moons.

Everyone interested in the matter: springboard from here. You'd be surprised the things you don't know about Pluto.

GuidoHunter · 03-26-2007, 12:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Afrobean

A moon is just a natural satelite.

Exactly. Nothing (of appreciable size, here) orbits Pluto. Charon (and Pluto itself) orbits a massless point in between the two.

What Vivi's saying is that Pluto doesn't have enough mass to have the center of orbit inside its own body.

--Guido

http://andy.mikee385.com

Magnum13 · 03-26-2007, 01:44 PM

I just think that the scientists can't make their minds up. I mean THEY were the ones who defined the planets as planets in the first place. They keep changing their own facts, not saying they're wrong, but they need to think of a solid answer to what makes fact, well, fact. By the way, I've never even heard of a "dwarf planet" all I've heard of is a dwarf star, and what are 3 differences between a planet and dwarf planet, and why is a dwarf planet not still considered a planet? It has the word planet in it.

GuidoHunter · 03-26-2007, 02:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Magnum13

I mean THEY were the ones who defined the planets as planets in the first place.

Not really. There was no "definition" other than "that's a big rock in space orbiting our sun. Let's call it a planet." That's not standardized by any means, and it allows for things that shouldn't be considered planets to be considered planets and vice versa.

This is the first time that a strict definition of a planet has been set down.

Quote:

They keep changing their own facts, not saying they're wrong,

Wrong.

They aren't changing any facts at all. Back then, we didn't know much about Pluto, so it indeed looked like a planet. Now we know that it shouldn't be considered one. They aren't saying that they were wrong because they were simply ignorant. There's nothing bad about that.

Quote:

but they need to think of a solid answer to what makes fact, well, fact.

THAT'S WHAT THEY JUST DID!!!

And guess what. Pluto didn't meet all the criteria. Cry about it.

--Guido

http://andy.mikee385.com

Pichu_XP · 03-26-2007, 02:51 PM

Earth didn't exactly meet them either.

jewpinthethird · 03-26-2007, 09:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pichu_XP

Earth didn't exactly meet them either.

Shut up and read a god damn astronomy textbook.

GuidoHunter · 03-26-2007, 11:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pichu_XP

Earth didn't exactly meet them either.

What the hell have you been reading? Of course Earth meets all the requirements.

--Guido

http://andy.mikee385.com

jewpinthethird · 03-26-2007, 11:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GuidoHunter

What the hell have you been reading? Of course Earth meets all the requirements.

--Guido

http://andy.mikee385.com

He's reading between the lines...obviously.

CrimsonFlashAznGurl · 03-30-2007, 08:13 PM

Its SOoooo True that Pluto is not a plan and all along in grade school they say its a planet. later my sisters in high or collage.. univesity and so on told me it is not a PLANET!!!!

Pichu_XP · 04-2-2007, 06:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jewpinthethird

He's reading between the lines...obviously.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wikipedia

Earth, Mars, Jupiter and Neptune have not cleared their orbital neighbourhoods either. Earth co-orbits with 10,000 near-Earth asteroids, and Jupiter has 100,000 Trojan asteroids in its orbital path.

If Wikipedia doesn't cut it. Original article

madmatt621 · 04-2-2007, 06:36 PM

Why you bumping the thread from 3 days ago?

Pichu_XP · 04-2-2007, 06:37 PM

I'm adding information I didn't give before.

Not all bumps are bad.

Afrobean · 04-3-2007, 07:09 AM

I don't get how a planet could have things in its orbital path.

The planet would collide with the object then there would no longer be an object in its path.

Unless you're saying that the object in its path is on a strange orbit, much like the strange orbit Pluto is on. In which case, I submit: Who gives a ****. Pluto's not a planet stop bitching. You should all be glad that it was given classification as "dwarf planet" and not simply called "large asteroid".

Pichu_XP · 04-3-2007, 04:03 PM

I never said anywhere that I disagreed with the decision. I'm just saying the standards they made up in order to make that decision is faulty.

03-25-2007, 08:51 PM	#21
Pichu_XP FFR Player Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: 2008 Posts: 950	Re: Pluto's Demotion But! The standards that they settled on to demote the thing is poorly thought up. Though, I can't really think of anything better myself... __________________ Last edited by Pichu_XP; 03-26-2007 at 02:51 PM.. Reason: typo

03-26-2007, 12:13 AM	#23
Magnum13 FFR Player Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: In your mind, and it scares me. Age: 31 Posts: 311	Re: Pluto's Demotion pluto's a planet, always has been, end of story, goodbye. __________________ There are nO suBliminal mEssages in mY foruM signaturE

03-26-2007, 07:26 AM	#26
FishFishRevolution GotR Creator Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Vi sitter här i venten Current Band: The National Age: 36 Posts: 7,251	Re: Pluto's Demotion Wait how can you have an opinion on something that's just been defined? It's a fact, not an opinion. __________________

03-26-2007, 01:44 PM	#29
Magnum13 FFR Player Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: In your mind, and it scares me. Age: 31 Posts: 311	Re: Pluto's Demotion I just think that the scientists can't make their minds up. I mean THEY were the ones who defined the planets as planets in the first place. They keep changing their own facts, not saying they're wrong, but they need to think of a solid answer to what makes fact, well, fact. By the way, I've never even heard of a "dwarf planet" all I've heard of is a dwarf star, and what are 3 differences between a planet and dwarf planet, and why is a dwarf planet not still considered a planet? It has the word planet in it. __________________ There are nO suBliminal mEssages in mY foruM signaturE

03-26-2007, 02:51 PM	#31
Pichu_XP FFR Player Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: 2008 Posts: 950	Re: Pluto's Demotion Earth didn't exactly meet them either. __________________

03-30-2007, 08:13 PM	#35
CrimsonFlashAznGurl FFR Player Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: California Posts: 23	Re: Pluto's Demotion Its SOoooo True that Pluto is not a plan and all along in grade school they say its a planet. later my sisters in high or collage.. univesity and so on told me it is not a PLANET!!!!

04-2-2007, 06:36 PM	#37
madmatt621 Banned Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: 29°34′7″N, 95°1′21″W Age: 35 Posts: 3,000	Re: Pluto's Demotion Why you bumping the thread from 3 days ago?

04-2-2007, 06:37 PM	#38
Pichu_XP FFR Player Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: 2008 Posts: 950	Re: Pluto's Demotion I'm adding information I didn't give before. Not all bumps are bad. __________________

04-3-2007, 07:09 AM	#39
Afrobean Admiral in the Red Army Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: the moon Age: 36 Posts: 13,262	Re: Pluto's Demotion I don't get how a planet could have things in its orbital path. The planet would collide with the object then there would no longer be an object in its path. Unless you're saying that the object in its path is on a strange orbit, much like the strange orbit Pluto is on. In which case, I submit: Who gives a ****. Pluto's not a planet stop bitching. You should all be glad that it was given classification as "dwarf planet" and not simply called "large asteroid". __________________

04-3-2007, 04:03 PM	#40
Pichu_XP FFR Player Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: 2008 Posts: 950	Re: Pluto's Demotion I never said anywhere that I disagreed with the decision. I'm just saying the standards they made up in order to make that decision is faulty. __________________

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)