Is Gravity About To Get Plutoed?

[TLK Valentine]

Ya ... good question.

It's easier to ridicule one man who disagrees with Pluto's demotion, than take on a whole political body, isn't it?

Indeed -- ignorance, arrogance, and power is a dangerous combination.

Of course it's easier -- you have no power.

You "scientists" aren't really interested in how I feel about it, are you?

I wouldn't call myself a scientist, but I know I wouldn't care if you'd just stop yapping about it. it's annoying, and it gets in the way of the intelligent discussions that happen on this board.

If you were, you'd actually investigate it and see what others think ... (not that you'd actually care).

Don;t particularly care about them or you. Again, unless they have anything meaningful to contribute to this or any other discussion, they're just making noise.

But hey, a scientist actually investigating something? when he can just ridicule a Christian on the Net? sounds like fun, doesn't it?

What's to investigate? A few politicians think they can legislate science -- yet another example of the powerful but ignorant sticking their noses in places they have no business being, and wouldn't know what to do if they got in.

 

[AV1611VET]

Well, I'm terribly sorry that your pretty wee li'l feewings are hurt by me saying that, but has the IAU changed the definition of planet in order to accomodate the legislation in those states? No. Are they going to? No. Making legislation of which you know it will not have any effect whatsoever, and on issues that you know nothing about in the first place, cannot be described as anything else than insane. It has nothing to do with "us knowing better", or any of your other childish wee li'l insults.

It doesn't have anything to do with that.

Again, we discovered a new dwarf planet that was bigger than Pluto and around the same distance from the sun. Apparently, according to you, we should just have pretended that that did not happen. That is insane to say the least.

Coming from you, it is also extremely hypocritical. One the one hand, you lambast "scientists" for allowing thalidomide. But here, you lambast "scientists" for taking new information into account. What you are proposing here in "thalidomide-speak", is that we should just have continued using thalidomide after we had shown conclusively that it is harmful. The position you take in this matter is basically that we should not act on new information when it is available. It is hypocritical, dumb, insane, and when applied to other fields it is extremely dangerous.

You haven't read the 5th post, have you?

There are actual scientists who disagree with you (or are they 'insane' as well)?

Okay with you if I disagree as well?

 

[TLK Valentine]

Ya ... are hoal werld am ignit, cept yoo guys, ai'nt wee?

More or less -- politicians and the religious, if they're not fulfilling their responsibilities of leadership, are little more than parasites.

 

[AV1611VET]

What's to investigate?

Why don't you ask the [real] planetary scientists who disagree with Pluto's demotion?

(Of course, you would have to recognize one, first; wouldn't you?)

 

[TLK Valentine]

You tell them.

Why? They want to be the grand dukes of Ignoristan, who am I to stop them? In the end, they'll only hurt themselves and the people dumb enough to give them the power they don't deserve.

I want to see the look on your face when you "scientists"* step on the wrong toes.

Of course you would -- it would fulfill a revenge fantasy.

You might be a hot shot in the lab, but elsewhere, you're just people with pocket protectors and white coats.

And where, if anywhere, are you a hot shot, AV? Where, if anywhere, have you ever made a difference?

* And yes, I know you're not a scientist, per se; I believe you're a professor of literature.

Indeed -- which means I can recognize both the tangible and intangible contributes people make to civilization -- and I can recognize those who have come up short.

(If you are who I think you are.)

Or... if you remember the PM I sent you telling you who I was.

 

[AV1611VET]

More or less -- politicians and the religious, if they're not fulfilling their responsibilities of leadership, are little more than parasites.

Don't forget [real] scientists who [would dare] disagree with you.

Are they little more than parasites as well?

 

[TLK Valentine]

Why don't you ask the [real] planetary scientists who disagree with Pluto's demotion?

(Of course, you would have to recognize one, first; wouldn't you?)

I've heard their arguments -- they've got some valid points, but in the end, the demoters had better ones.

 

[TLK Valentine]

You haven't read the 5th post, have you?

There are actual scientists who disagree with you (or are they 'insane' as well)?

Okay with you if I disagree as well?

Feel free to leech off whatever you wish, AV -- your opinion is insignificant.

 

[AV1611VET]

Or... if you remember the PM I sent you telling you who I was.

I remember.

 

[AV1611VET]

I've heard their arguments -- they've got some valid points, but in the end, the demoters had better ones.

Is that why they had to rig the vote?

 

[Tomk80]

Why don't you ask the [real] planetary scientists who disagree with Pluto's demotion?

(Of course, you would have to recognize one, first; wouldn't you?)

Because if those scientists would have "won", we would now have more than 9 planets and you would still be whining.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Is that why they had to rig the vote?

Ah, folks do love their conspiracy theories, don't they? Bad enough for the dissenting scientists to be sore losers, but to leech off other sore losers is beneath even you, AV.

 

[Tomk80]

And quite possibly the insane legislation brigade would have drew up legislation that Eris, Ceres and Haumia are not planets, because learning more than 9 planets is too hard for their pwity li'l bwains.

 

[TLK Valentine]

And quite possibly the insane legislation brigade would have drew up legislation that Eris, Ceres and Haumia are not planets, because learning more than 9 planets is too hard for their pwity li'l bwains.

There is that -- the only thing more fascinating than the things we learn every day is the length that some people will go not to have to learn them.

 

[AV1611VET]

Because if those scientists would have "won", we would now have more than 9 planets and you would still be whining.

Ahem ... Post 5 please?

Remember the point she made?

Should you apply the same logic to the periodic table?

Should you apply the same logic to the moons that orbit our planets?

You want to demote 1000 planets to keep 8, yet you'll keep the periodic table and our moons increasing, won't you?

 

[TLK Valentine]

Ahem ... Post 5 please?

Remember the point she made?

Should you apply the same logic to the periodic table?

Should you apply the same logic to the moons that orbit our planets?

You want to demote 1000 planets to keep 8, yet you'll keep the periodic table and our moons increasing, won't you?

other way around, AV -- you need 9 planets to satisfy your Biblical numerology -- neither the periodic table nor moons matter to you, because you haven't staked anything on them.

 

[Tomk80]

Ahem ... Post 5 please?

Remember the point she made?

Should you apply the same logic to the periodic table?

No need, because atoms are already well-defined, while planets were not. But yes, if we found a new thing that showed that our current definition of atom is not consistent, we should change it. And if that means that Einsteinium is than not an atom anymore, we should not designate it as such anymore.

Should you apply the same logic to the moons that orbit our planets?

Yes, and we already do. There has been discussion on whether Cruithne was in fact a second moon of earth.

Again, if the definition we hold turns out to be inconsistent, we have to sharpen the definition. And that means that things that first fell within that definition can now fall outside of it. It has happened in science many times before, and will probably happen many times again.

You want to demote 1000 planets to keep 8, yet you'll keep the periodic table and our moons increasing, won't you?

Given that this leads to consistent definitions, yes.

 

[AV1611VET]

other way around, AV -- you need 9 planets to satisfy your Biblical numerology -- neither the periodic table nor moons matter to you, because you haven't staked anything on them.

As much as you'd like to think, this isn't about me; it's about how scientists will do what they have to do to get the results they're looking for ... from calibrating equipment, to rigging votes.

 

[Mr. Pedantic]

I don't see the problem with Pluto's "demotion". It is much more similar to other dwarf planets than it is to any planet. I notice that none of you complain about the very controversial divisions that occur in the taxonomy of life. Why this very vocal, and rather puerile clamour, when talking about the planets?

Is it because of Walt Disney?

 

[Tomk80]

As much as you'd like to think, this isn't about me; it's about how scientists will do what they have to do to get the results they're looking for ... from calibrating equipment, to rigging votes.

That has to be the dumbest description of what happened I have heard by far.