Pluto Challenge

[AV1611VET]

I'm amazed that you could think that going out and investigating reality to find out things about the world is a Biblical instruction given to us, but then you turn around and say that what we find from investigating reality is wrong. That's a classic example of cognitive dissonance.

Either that, or your version of reality is extremely compartmentalized: relegated mainly to the empirical senses.

 

[J_B_]

This thread is specifically for @AV1611VET since it's a topic he loves to bring up.

I feel left out. Are there topics other people love to bring up?

 

[Kylie]

Either that, or your version of reality is extremely compartmentalized: relegated mainly to the empirical senses.

Nah, I just think that our investigation of reality should be confined to things that we can show are actually real.

 

[AV1611VET]

Nah, I just think that our investigation of reality should be confined to things that we can show are actually real.

How's that working out for your crusade against things you perceive to be illogical?

 

[Kylie]

How's that working out for your crusade against things you perceive to be illogical?

About as well as can be expected. I'm still waiting for you to give me an example of a time when reality was wrong.

 

[AV1611VET]

About as well as can be expected. I'm still waiting for you to give me an example of a time when reality was wrong.

And I'm still waiting for you to tell me if the Trinity is illogical.

 

[Kylie]

And I'm still waiting for you to tell me if the Trinity is illogical.

You mean this?

If A=X, and B=X, and C=X, then A, B, and C are also equal to each other. So this diagram is illogical.

Now, can you answer my question?

 

[AV1611VET]

If A=X, and B=X, and C=X, then A, B, and C are also equal to each other. So this diagram is illogical.

Maybe on paper; but not in the real universe.

Now, can you answer my question?

Sure: 2006.

The Pluto vote.

 

[Kylie]

Maybe on paper; but not in the real universe.

Unsupported assertion

Sure: 2006.

The Pluto vote.

Wow, that's a terrible argument. The vote did not change anything about reality except a label which was arbitrary to begin with. Try again.

 

[The happy Objectivist]

This thread is specifically for @AV1611VET since it's a topic he loves to bring up.

Pluto is demoted from full planetary status to dwarf planet.

It's still up in space, still going around the sun, the same as it always did since it formed all those millions of years ago.

How does demoting it from planetary status change anything about it?

It doesn't. It only changes the way we classify it.

 

[AV1611VET]

Wow, that's a terrible argument.

No it isn't.

In 2005, Pluto was considered our ninth planet.

That was your reality at the time.

But things changed -- and your reality changed with it.

In other words, your reality changes with the next discovery, or rigged vote, or error correction, or you name it.

Your reality is in constant flux.

 

[Kylie]

No it isn't.

In 2005, Pluto was considered our ninth planet.

That was your reality at the time.

But things changed -- and your reality changed with it.

In other words, your reality changes with the next discovery, or rigged vote, or error correction, or you name it.

Your reality is in constant flux.

Absolute rubbish.

Nothing about the reality of Pluto itself changed.

The only thing that changed was how we refer to it.

Your unending determination to confuse the two is tiresome.

 

[AV1611VET]

The only thing that changed was how we refer to it.

Let's talk about BEFORE THE CHANGE though.

Before the change, what was the reality about Pluto?

 

[Kylie]

Let's talk about BEFORE THE CHANGE though.

Before the change, what was the reality about Pluto?

Let's talk about the before AND after.

What changes happened to the REALITY of Pluto after the vote when compared to BEFORE?

 

[NxNW]

Let's talk about the before AND after.

What changes happened to the REALITY of Pluto after the vote when compared to BEFORE?

The reality is that it no longer meets the definition of a planet. If it did, then as our telescopes get better, we're going to end up with a bunch more "planets" which are really just captured objects instead of something that was formed with the solar system.

 

[Kylie]

The reality is that it no longer meets the definition of a planet. If it did, then as our telescopes get better, we're going to end up with a bunch more "planets" which are really just captured objects instead of something that was formed with the solar system.

But nothing about the reality of Pluto changed. The only thing that changed was the way we think of it.

 

[AV1611VET]

But nothing about the reality of Pluto changed. The only thing that changed was the way we think of it.

QV please:

Our solar system's shadowy ninth (dwarf) planet was the subject of furious speculation and a frantic search for almost a century before it was finally discovered by Clyde Tombaugh in 1930. And remarkably, Pluto's reality was deduced using a heady array of reasoning, observation and no small amount of imagination.

SOURCE

 

[Kylie]

QV please:


SOURCE

I can't see what point you are trying to make.

Figuring out that something is real does not affect the thing's actual realness in any way.

 

[SelfSim]

I would say a lot changed about Pluto's objective reality on and around July 14, 2015, when New Horizons imaged it at close range.

It takes observational data to change astronomical objective reality .. as per @AV1611VET's quote: 'Pluto's reality was deduced using a heady array of reasoning, observation and no small amount of imagination'. (Of course, I'd say he ignored the 'observation' part in his own reference there).

 

[Kylie]

I would say a lot changed about Pluto's objective reality on and around July 14, 2015, when New Horizons imaged it at close range.

It takes observational data to change astronomical objective reality .. as per @AV1611VET's quote: 'Pluto's reality was deduced using a heady array of reasoning, observation and no small amount of imagination'. (Of course, I'd say he ignored the 'observation' part in his own reference there).

I'd respectfully disagree.

What changed was our understanding of Pluto's reality, but nothing about Pluto's reality itself was changed. New Horizons didn't make any change to Pluto.