Challenge Thread: Were you wrong about Pluto?

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

I'm not alone, am I?

I've said it countless times before, but it is still such a weird hill to want to die on.
Pluto isn't a planet. Big whoop.

 

[AV1611VET]

I've said it countless times before, but it is still such a weird hill to want to die on.
Pluto isn't a planet. Big whoop.

Yes, it is a big whoop.

Big enough to cause quite a stir.

Right up to the legislative level.

So while some are just shrugging their shoulders and wondering what all the hullabaloo is about, others are busy doing something science should have done in the first place: peer reviewing it.

But instead of peer reviewing it, science [illegally] voted on it.

And you guys think that's all okay.

Whatever.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Yes, it is a big whoop.

Big enough to cause quite a stir.

Right up to the legislative level.

So while some are just shrugging their shoulders and wondering what all the hullabaloo is about, others are busy doing something science should have done in the first place: peer reviewing it.

But instead of peer reviewing it, science [illegally] voted on it.

And you guys think that's all okay.

Whatever.

How does Pluto not being a planet affect your life?

 

[AV1611VET]

How does Pluto not being a planet affect your life?

Not one iota.

How does the Nebraska Man embarrassment affect yours?

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Not one iota.

How does the Nebraska Man embarrassment affect yours?

Not in the slightest, although it's not really the same thing when you continually bring it up to try and claim science knows nothing.

Yet you continually act as if Pluto being demoted is some major slight against you. Why is that?

 

[AV1611VET]

Yet you continually act as if Pluto being demoted is some major slight against you.

Well now you know differently, don't you?

And speaking of major slights, how about we post the Ten Commandments on the courthouse lawn and see major colonel slights show up pronto?

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Well now you know differently, don't you?

And speaking of major slights, how about we post the Ten Commandments on the courthouse lawn and see major colonel slights show up pronto?

But you do act as if it's a major slight against you. You bring it up every time that you feel science needs to be taken a potshot at when it's the smallest negative thing that science could have done. So why do you continually feel that it's something important when it's really not?

And the Ten Commandments on a courthouse lawn is a thing in your own country because of your Constitution. Deal with that in your own way.

 

[AV1611VET]

But you do act as if it's a major slight against you. You bring it up every time that you feel science needs to be taken a potshot at when it's the smallest negative thing that science could have done. So why do you continually feel that it's something important when it's really not?

And the Ten Commandments on a courthouse lawn is a thing in your own country because of your Constitution. Deal with that in your own way.

Have a good day.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Have a good day.

You really just don't like answering questions, do you?

 

[Hans Blaster]

Well now you know differently, don't you?

And speaking of major slights, how about we post the Ten Commandments on the courthouse lawn and see major colonel slights show up pronto?

As Reagan said once: "We'll there you go again."

 

[Ophiolite]

Public reception to the IAU decision was mixed.

I am unaware of any instance in which microbiologists, for example, have complained about, for example, changes in stratigraphic nomenclature decided upon by geologists. Nor any "mixed reception" to any decision on classification by scientists from one discpline, by scientists of another discipline.

Why this absence of concern, or indeed of support? I put it down to the fact that the majority of scientists are intelligent enough to know they lack the knowledge to offer any comment of value for something requiring expertise outside their field. And then there is just the common courtesy of not sticking your nose in where it is neither needed, nor wanted.

 

[AV1611VET]

I am unaware of any instance in which microbiologists, for example, have complained about, for example, changes in stratigraphic nomenclature decided upon by geologists. Nor any "mixed reception" to any decision on classification by scientists from one discpline, by scientists of another discipline.

Why this absence of concern, or indeed of support? I put it down to the fact that the majority of scientists are intelligent enough to know they lack the knowledge to offer any comment of value for something requiring expertise outside their field. And then there is just the common courtesy of not sticking your nose in where it is neither needed, nor wanted.

QV please:

There has been some resistance within the astronomical community toward the reclassification. Alan Stern, principal investigator with NASA's New Horizons mission to Pluto, derided the IAU resolution, stating that "the definition stinks, for technical reasons".

SOURCE

What would be your advice to Alan Stern?

 

[Ophiolite]

QV please:

SOURCE

What would be your advice to Alan Stern?

What don't you get? Stern is part of the "astronomical community". I explicitly stated that criticism on matters of classification by scientists outside the relevant discipline didn't, to my knowledge occur. Within given communities, of course there will be wide ranging criticisms, arguments and nuclear level blow ups. That's part of how science advances.

Stern has the expertise to comment on the decision. He has the expertise to be bitter about the decision. He has the expertise that entitles him, should be choose, to rant and rave about the decision.

You don't.

Elitist? Only of you think it is elitist to prefer a qualified surgeon remove your appendix rather than an opinionated market gardener.

 

[AV1611VET]

What don't you get? Stern is part of the "astronomical community". I explicitly stated that criticism on matters of classification by scientists outside the relevant discipline didn't, to my knowledge occur.

Okay. My bad.

 

[jamiec]

In another thread, someone made this comment:
If this is your sentiment as well, were you wrong about Pluto being our ninth planet?

One accepts that there are scientific objections to the theory of evolution. As a complete layman in such matters, I am content to accept that, for all practical purposes, it is morally certain - therefore not inarguably and unanswerably certain - that the theory of evolution is a fact. ISTM that even the most certain conclusions in any branch of knowledge ought to be revised, should this be required by available evidence.

I could not care less about accessory matters, such as the political or other associations made between the theory, and those who have accepted some form of it. It is valid, if at all, on its own merits, regardless of the politics, morals, etc., of those who accept it - as is the case with any idea or fact. Just as the Earth is reckoned to be an oblate spheroid, because that is the conclusion to which the relevant evidence leads; regardless of the morals, politics, religion, etc., of those who draw that conclusion.

Appropriate conclusions regarding a topic cannot be drawn from what is irrelevant to the topic, nor be avoided because conclusions from relevant evidence might be unwelcome.

 

[Kylie]

Okay, AV, I have two questions for you.

1. How many things in our solar system do you think SHOULD be counted as planets?

2. Please give me a definition of "planet" we can use.

 

[Yttrium]

Okay, AV, I have two questions for you.

1. How many things in our solar system do you think SHOULD be counted as planets?

2. Please give me a definition of "planet" we can use.

I think the only way we're going to satisfy AV's 9 planets standard is to replace the part about sweeping the orbit with one that states that a planet has to have a mean radius of at least 1,180 km. It's a simple, arbitrary rule that lets Pluto be a planet and not Eris.

Now if we can just rig the vote to make it happen...

 

[Opdrey]

Pluto. Who knew that the entirety of science, the very FOUNDATION of science would so easily crumble because Pluto was demoted.

I think we all enjoyed science while it lasted. I know I did. I enjoy this computer and all these wonderdrugs that keep us all alive and healthy. But it had to come to an end one day. Now that we no longer have "science" to rely on we will need to back to good ol' religion to help us explain the universe. Thankfully there are no "rigged votes" or "bad actors" in religion.

Dr. Dino is here to show us how it is done. (I'm not sure if this is his mugshot or not)

 

[Hans Blaster]

Pluto. Who knew that the entirety of science, the very FOUNDATION of science would so easily crumble because Pluto was demoted.

I think we all enjoyed science while it lasted. I know I did. I enjoy this computer and all these wonderdrugs that keep us all alive and healthy. But it had to come to an end one day. Now that we no longer have "science" to rely on we will need to back to good ol' religion to help us explain the universe. Thankfully there are no "rigged votes" or "bad actors" in religion.

Dr. Dino is here to show us how it is done. (I'm not sure if this is his mugshot or not)

Aghhhh!

Begone foul demon!

 

[Kylie]

I think the only way we're going to satisfy AV's 9 planets standard is to replace the part about sweeping the orbit with one that states that a planet has to have a mean radius of at least 1,180 km. It's a simple, arbitrary rule that lets Pluto be a planet and not Eris.

Now if we can just rig the vote to make it happen...

I guess that means Jupiter is a quintuple planet system then, since Jupiter and it's four largest moons would be classified as planets by that reasoning. @AV1611VET does that sound good to you?