New Hi-Res Pluto Image

a reply to: newWorldSamurai

It will always be a planet to me...

originally posted by: JadeStar

originally posted by: newWorldSamurai
I refute the notion that Pluto is not a planet.

No one said it's not a planet. It's a dwarf planet, like Ceres. But its a Kuiper Belt Object like Makemake or Quaor.

Really!? You're going to argue semantics? Lol...pretty sure they were just making a point and are referring to the notion that it's not a planet in the solar system.
Universe Today - Why Pluto is no Longer a Planet - www.universetoday.com...

originally posted by: intrptr
I disagree. That huge ice field looks like the after math of a giant impactor.

or melted by an electric arc

Face on Pluto : ) or just a case of Pareidolia, you decide, crater on west side:

I'm not sure that we've found out anything startling by the New Horizons mission. Its a ball of rock and frozen stuff. As expected. The expense is too high to visit one object that far out. The Kupier belt is interesting and needs to be explored, but we need a probe that visit multiple objects to be cost-effective, or at least have multiple-purposes. I wonder how long before we send another probe out that far...

a reply to: JadeStar

For my money Miranda is the moon they used to restock. If interstellar arks of some sort were traversing the stars, terraforming new worlds, they would require huge amounts of raw material for fuel, water, air, soil…

Mirandna looks like it has been gouged by a giant something, plowing furrows like a farmer plows a field . Twice

Miranda

Further: Thanks for describing the "dirty snowball" component of these remote objects. I can't wait for the camera to resolve some more Kuiper belt "objects". From a certain perspective, the solar system has many more planets (hundreds, thousands?) that science can argue over whether they are moons, objects or planets.

originally posted by: bottleslingguy

originally posted by: intrptr
I disagree. That huge ice field looks like the after math of a giant impactor.

or melted by an electric arc

Thats some power source.

originally posted by: ArMaP

originally posted by: wildespace
But since the colour in the OPs image comes from a low-rez photo, I can't wait to see a proper high-rez image from the colour camera.

Doesn't the colour camera have a lower resolution than the camera used for this image?

It does, but as the spacecraft flung by Pluto, that camera got a decently-high-rez global view of the dwarf planet. (at least that's what the author of the OP's image says).

a reply to: wildespace

I understand that, what I meant was that the colour images will always be of a lower resolution when compared to the monochromatic images.

I hope we get good images.

originally posted by: Ozsheeple
a reply to: wmd_2008

I saw a face like structure, therefore aliens

Posts like this are why ATS needs downvoting.

Still get amazed that it's not blue.

seriously cool though.

a reply to: Nustle

I swear I have a Vampire the Masquerade trading card with that exact face. Pluto must be the province of the Nosferatu.

O-M-G: www.nasa.gov...

O: www.nasa.gov...

M: www.nasa.gov...

G: www.nasa.gov...

I think most people can't process the gravity of what they are looking at with these new images, in all its Qliphotic glory. Rara Avis.

originally posted by: trifecta
I think most people can't process the gravity of what they are looking at with these new images, in all its Qliphotic glory. Rara Avis.

i do, i was expressing it with my omg post...ahahahahhaha. I'm kinda shocked...im also kinda pissed about declissifing this piece of art of planet years ago. Shame of bored humans.

originally posted by: JadeStar

originally posted by: newWorldSamurai
I refute the notion that Pluto is not a planet.

No one said it's not a planet. It's a dwarf planet, like Ceres. But its a Kuiper Belt Object like Makemake or Quaor.

You still beg the question. Being relatively smaller than the other planets does not necessarily make it a former Kuiper Belt Object. There is NO evidence to support that conjecture, which is born not from any science but out of a purely practical attempt by astronomers to distinguish between KBOs and true planets.
A scientific fact is not what we would would like to believe because it makes life for scientists easier. It is something that is verified by repeated experiments, not arbitrarily defined into existence by a minority of astronomers who stayed behind after 90% of their colleagues had gone home from their annual conference, as was the case when Pluto was demoted as a planet.

a reply to: wmd_2008

Amazing! Cant wait for more pictures to come

a reply to: micpsi

I don't agree with the demotion of Pluto, either, but I do understand the definition put into place for further discoveries. None of the KBO's have cleared their orbit, and the eccentricity of most of them does make planetary status suspect.

originally posted by: ArMaP
a reply to: wildespace

I understand that, what I meant was that the colour images will always be of a lower resolution when compared to the monochromatic images.

I hope we get good images.

High-rez enough for you? www.nasa.gov...

a reply to: wildespace