Challenge Thread: Was Pluto our Ninth Planet in the Fourth Century?

[VirOptimus]

Or more.

Any but nine.

Because numerology, thats totally also very rational.

Did Satan also add one toe and finger to (almost) every human?

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Irrespective of whether threads can be blocked or not, this thread doesn't make any sense like many of the OP's 'challenges'.
It's almost as if he is trying to outdo himself in the level of inanity.

AV appears to be taking Matthew 18:3 literally...

 

[Yttrium]

Or more.

Any but nine.

Well, then you shouldn't get worked up over the vote that changed the definition of what a planet is. Because if that vote hadn't taken place, and we stuck with the old definition, we still wouldn't have nine planets. We'd have more like thirteen now.

To get exactly nine, we'd have to add a new standard, one that sets a specific lower limit on the size or mass. And since hardly anybody is aware of your numerology issue, or would care if they did know, that's not likely to happen.

 

[TLK Valentine]

I ...

A ...

You ...

Nevermind.

You call them "crooks." What did they steal from you?

 

[AV1611VET]

You call them "crooks." What did they steal from you?

Was John Dillinger a crook? Enron? BP? Al Capone? NASA?

 

[Yttrium]

Actually, now that I think about it, the only thing I know of that relies on a numerology of nine planets is the zodiac...

 

[AV1611VET]

Actually, now that I think about it, the only thing I know of that relies on a numerology of nine planets is the zodiac...

The Zodiac is Satan's cheap imitation for the Mazzaroth, which is Israel's history written in advance.

 

[pgp_protector]

There we are.
I think this was why AV1611Vet loved Pluto being the the 9th, and that we can't add any more (as then there wouldn't be 9 planets) or remove any.

Is Gravity About To Get Plutoed?

 

[AV1611VET]

There we are.
I think this was why AV1611Vet loved Pluto being the the 9th, and that we can't add any more (as then there wouldn't be 9 planets) or remove any.

Is Gravity About To Get Plutoed?

See also Post 16 in this thread.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Was John Dillinger a crook? Enron? BP? Al Capone? NASA?

What did the IAU steal?

 

[AV1611VET]

What did the IAU steal?

Qualified astronomers' rights to vote.

 

[Yttrium]

Qualified astronomers' rights to vote.

This really, really doesn't help your nine planets issue.

 

[AV1611VET]

This really, really doesn't help your nine planets issue.

QV please: The Pluto Issue

 

[sjastro]

Qualified astronomers' rights to vote.

Caught out telling porkies.
In the the other Pluto thread.

I'm not interested in bagging the IAU.

 

[Yttrium]

QV please: The Pluto Issue

I mean that if the rules hadn't changed, we'd have more than nine planets now.

 

[sjastro]

AV appears to be taking Matthew 18:3 literally...

On the subject of biblical quotes note how AV uses the Bible to justify ignorance and bigotry.
Its ironic he should select the 4th century when Christianity became the state religion of the Roman Empire and the Bible became accepted.
The Bible also reflected the Roman view of a geocentric universe (a view that prevailed for over a thousand years as illustrated by Luther's attack on Copernicus) of seven planets the Sun, Moon, Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter and Saturn.

AV should lobby the IAU to restore planetary status to the Sun and Moon so it becomes consistent with the Bible.

 

[sjastro]

In the 1800s there were twelve planets Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Ceres, Vesta, Pallas, Juno, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus and, eventually, Neptune.
Pluto was not the first planet to get the chop.
The demotion of Ceres, Vesta, Pallas and Juno involves a debate among astronomers about whether the term “asteroid” was originally used to mean a small type of planet, rather than a different type of object altogether.

It is often claimed that asteroids' sharing of orbits is the reason they were re-classified from planets to non-planets. A critical review of the literature from the 19th Century to the present shows this is factually incorrect. The literature shows the term asteroid was broadly recognized as a subset of planet for 150 years. On-going discovery of asteroids resulted in a de facto stretching of the concept of planet to include the ever-smaller bodies. Scientists found utility in this taxonomic identification as it provided categories needed to argue for the leading hypothesis of planet formation, Laplace's nebular hypothesis. In the 1950s, developments in planet formation theory found it no longer useful to maintain taxonomic identification between asteroids and planets, Ceres being the primary exception. At approximately the same time, there was a flood of publications on the geophysical nature of asteroids showing them to be geophysically different than the large planets. This is when the terminology in asteroid publications calling them planets abruptly plunged from a high level of usage where it had hovered during the period 1801 - 1957 to a low level that held constant thereafter. This marks the point where the community effectively formed consensus that asteroids should be taxonomically distinct from planets. The evidence demonstrates this consensus formed on the basis of geophysical differences between asteroids and planets, not the sharing of orbits. We suggest attempts to build consensus around planetary taxonomy not rely on the non-scientific process of voting, but rather through precedent set in scientific literature and discourse, by which perspectives evolve with additional observations and information, just as they did in the case of asteroids.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Qualified astronomers' rights to vote.

Ah, but vote on what, exactly? Since when do you side with scientists?

 

[AV1611VET]

Since when do you side with scientists?

Since here:

1. Bible says x, Science says x = go with x
2. Bible says x, Science says y = go with x
3. Bible says x, Science says ø = go with x
4. Bible says ø, Science says x = go with x
5. Bible says ø, Science says ø = free to speculate on your own

 

[pgp_protector]

Since here:

1. Bible says x, Science says x = go with x
2. Bible says x, Science says y = go with x
3. Bible says x, Science says ø = go with x
4. Bible says ø, Science says x = go with x
5. Bible says ø, Science says ø = free to speculate on your own

And according to this what does the Bible say about Pluto?