Challenge Thread: Were you wrong about Pluto?

[BeyondET]

Is an SUV a car or a trunk?

Truckcar

 

[AV1611VET]

I was right to go along with the best experts on a matter like this where I have no special knowledge myself.

But you're not going with the best experts.

From another thread:

Only four percent of the IAU voted on the controversial demotion of Pluto, and most are not planetary scientists.

It was a rigged vote, as most of the "best experts" were locked out.

 

[SkyWriting]

But you're not going with the best experts.

From another thread:It was a rigged vote, as most of the "best experts" were locked out.

I think that most things supported by science are done on a minority vote by people who choose the "righter" answer.

 

[AV1611VET]

I think that most things supported by science are done on a minority vote by people who choose the "righter" answer.

Even legitimate majority votes aren't a guarantee the right vote was made.

That's what gave us the Challenger, the Deepwater Horizon, L'Aquila, and Thalidomide.

To name a few.

 

[SkyWriting]

Even legitimate majority votes aren't a guarantee the right vote was made.

That's what gave us the Challenger, the Deepwater Horizon, L'Aquila, and Thalidomide.

To name a few.

But I had a stumpy little friend in college I would never have met except for Thalidomide.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Even legitimate majority votes aren't a guarantee the right vote was made.

That's what gave us the Challenger, the Deepwater Horizon, L'Aquila, and Thalidomide.

To name a few.

Thalidomide is literally the only one that I would agree with on that. The other's you need to provide evidence for otherwise they're exactly like your "Science calls miracles magic!" claim: Bogus.

 

[AV1611VET]

Thalidomide is literally the only one that I would agree with on that.

You don't think seismologists voted as to whether it was safe for people to return to their homes in L'Aquila?

The Challenger's administration took a vote on whether to proceed with the liftoff or not.

The other's you need to provide evidence for otherwise they're exactly like your "Science calls miracles magic!" claim: Bogus.

Provide evidence or it's bogus.

Wow.

That's a dangerous mindset.

Would you ignore a DANGER: MINE FIELD sign?

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

You don't think seismologists voted as to whether it was safe for people to return to their homes in L'Aquila?

Have evidence for this claim?

The Challenger's administration took a vote on whether to proceed with the liftoff or not.

And your evidence is?

Provide evidence or it's bogus.

Wow.

That's a dangerous mindset.

Would you ignore a DANGER: MINE FIELD sign?

NOT EVEN REMOVELY SIMILAR. Nice try though.

You make claims, why do you get defensive when you're asked to back them up?

 

[Kylie]

It was a rigged vote, as most of the "best experts" were locked out.

Do you have a source that supports your claim that most of the experts were deliberately prevented from voting?

Because you are making it sound like they wanted to vote, but they were told they couldn't. I have an image of all those scientists banging on the doors, shouting, "Let us in, we want to cast our vote," but the evil Pluto haters were like, "No! We want to remove Pluto's status as a planet, for reasons!" And then they opened the door and said, "ha ha! You are too late! We cast our vote without you!" and the scientists were all sad and said, "Oh no! Whatever shall we do now?"

 

[AV1611VET]

Do you have a source that supports your claim that most of the experts were deliberately prevented from voting?

Because you are making it sound like they wanted to vote, but they were told they couldn't.

QV please:

"Only four percent of the IAU voted on the controversial demotion of Pluto, and most are not planetary scientists. The vote was conducted in violation of the IAU's own bylaws on the last day of a two-week conference when most attendees already had left. No absentee voting was allowed. Supporters of the demotion resolution violated the IAU's own bylaws by putting this resolution on the General Assembly floor without first vetting it by the proper committee as IAU rules require. Also, many planetary scientists do not belong to the IAU and therefore had no say in this matter. When professional astronomers objecting to the demotion asked for a reopening of the planet debate at the 2009 IAU General Assembly, the IAU leadership adamantly refused."

Source: The Pluto Issue

 

[SkyWriting]

QV please:

"Only four percent of the IAU voted on the controversial demotion of Pluto, and most are not planetary scientists. The vote was conducted in violation of the IAU's own bylaws on the last day of a two-week conference when most attendees already had left. No absentee voting was allowed. Supporters of the demotion resolution violated the IAU's own bylaws by putting this resolution on the General Assembly floor without first vetting it by the proper committee as IAU rules require. Also, many planetary scientists do not belong to the IAU and therefore had no say in this matter. When professional astronomers objecting to the demotion asked for a reopening of the planet debate at the 2009 IAU General Assembly, the IAU leadership adamantly refused."

Source: The Pluto Issue

Ten years later, IAU Pluto vote remains controversial

 

[Kylie]

QV please:

"Only four percent of the IAU voted on the controversial demotion of Pluto, and most are not planetary scientists. The vote was conducted in violation of the IAU's own bylaws on the last day of a two-week conference when most attendees already had left. No absentee voting was allowed. Supporters of the demotion resolution violated the IAU's own bylaws by putting this resolution on the General Assembly floor without first vetting it by the proper committee as IAU rules require. Also, many planetary scientists do not belong to the IAU and therefore had no say in this matter. When professional astronomers objecting to the demotion asked for a reopening of the planet debate at the 2009 IAU General Assembly, the IAU leadership adamantly refused."

Source: The Pluto Issue

That does not prove that there was someone who was all, "I need to get Pluto removed from the list of planets, but how to do it? Ah! I have the perfect plan!" *evil cackling*

 

[Hans Blaster]

That does not prove that there was someone who was all, "I need to get Pluto removed from the list of planets, but how to do it? Ah! I have the perfect plan!" *evil cackling*

Except for Michael Brown...

How I Killed Pluto and Why It Had It Coming - Wikipedia

 

[AV1611VET]

That does not prove that there was someone who was all, "I need to get Pluto removed from the list of planets, but how to do it? Ah! I have the perfect plan!" *evil cackling*

How mature.

 

[SkyWriting]

How mature.

Usually it is the past-prime that are characterized by *evil cackling* rather than pre-teens.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

So AV, were YOU wrong about Pluto?

 

[AV1611VET]

So AV, were YOU wrong about Pluto?

Negative.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Negative.

And why is that?

 

[Ophiolite]

And why is that?

It does seem that he is making a lot of fuss about a celestial object he believes to be only about 6,000 years old.

 

[AV1611VET]

It does seem that he is making a lot of fuss about a celestial object ...

I'm not alone, am I?

"Public reception to the IAU decision was mixed. A resolution introduced in the California State Assembly facetiously called the IAU decision a "scientific heresy". The New Mexico House of Representatives passed a resolution in honor of Tombaugh, a longtime resident of that state, that declared that Pluto will always be considered a planet while in New Mexican skies and that March 13, 2007, was Pluto Planet Day. The Illinois Senate passed a similar resolution in 2009, on the basis that Clyde Tombaugh, the discoverer of Pluto, was born in Illinois. The resolution asserted that Pluto was "unfairly downgraded to a 'dwarf' planet" by the IAU." Some members of the public have also rejected the change, citing the disagreement within the scientific community on the issue, or for sentimental reasons, maintaining that they have always known Pluto as a planet and will continue to do so regardless of the IAU decision."

SOURCE

Notice a resolution in the California State Assembly facetiously calls it a 'scientific heresy'?

... he believes to be only about 6,000 years old.

Either that, or I believe Pluto is as old as God made it, but it has only been in existence for about 6000 years.