It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Pluto loses status as a planet

page: 3
0
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 05:59 PM
link   
Haha! Take that pluto!

Yeah!

Pluto got PWNED!




posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 06:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Timeseer

Originally posted by Vegemite
This is good. Pluto should have never been a planet


You should have never opened a science book. Cause you are killing science right now.

What gives you the right to say such ludicrous? Justify it even?


Umm becuase its silly to think of Pluto as a planet when its much more similar to Kuiper Belt Objects.

Originally posted by Vegemite
its just another kbo.


Neptune is also a kbo since Pluto as being part of the kbo goes right past the orbit of Neptune.

The Earth, Moon, Mars, and Jupiter lie in the Asteroid Belt... the actual asteroid belt. Not the main asteroid belt that you would confused as being the true asteroid belt. The true asteroid belt is of all the little bodies between the Earth's and Jupiter's orbit.

If Pluto cannot be considered a planet, because it lies in the KB. Then neither should Earth, Mars, and Jupiter, because they lie in the AB. Further Neptune also lies in the KB with Pluto.

Neptune isnt a KBO because Neptune destroys KBOs. If Pluto could capture Neptune inits orbit like Neptune captured its moon Triton or Mars captured the asteroid Phobos then I might reconsider it.


Originally posted by Vegemite
But i dont understand ehy peaple are so attached to pluto being a planet.


Because it is a planet? Even if the Idiotic Astronomical Union doesn't say it is.


Originally posted by Vegemite
Its not like its being destroyed, its still there but labeled different.


You are not smart enough to understand this subject. Please reframe from speaking any further.

This isn't a matter of destruction of physical objects. This is about the destruction of science and of the common man.

Let me ask you this at the meeting to discuss what Pluto should be identified as... do you honestly think there were any Middle Class people there? People who make less than a hundred thousand dollars a year.

You want me to reframe from speaking then you ask me a question? Whats that question even supposed to mean? Are you suggesting that planetary scientists are rich slobs with nothing better to do then to reclassify planets to upset whiny little children?



Originally posted by Vegemite
Its like someone getting upset because some one decided that small donuts are gonna be called donettes


That is not a correct simile... would you care to try again?

Yes I would. Just because a planet looks like a duck and acts like a duck doesnt make it a duck, because real planets run over ducks that are in their way.

That is a horrible analogy

[edit on 24-8-2006 by Vegemite]



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 06:22 PM
link   
Woah, these geeky discussions do get intense


I am still of the school of thought that we should classify planets based on their atmospheric/mineral composition and general shape. We shouldn't classify a planet due to something as arbitrary as what object it orbits.


Mars's "moons" should not even be considered such, they should be considered captured asteroids.

The Dwarf Planet designation for Pluto is logical and draws a distinction between the two types.


TG

posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 06:24 PM
link   
I always thought Pluto was a small planet.



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 06:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by sardion2000
Woah, these geeky discussions do get intense




They sure seem to...


Some need to chill a bit before punching that 'post' button.

On a personal note, I always liked Pluto...whenever I see the name I think of a good natured Disney dog with a big lolling tongue.

Planet or dwarf planet, ancient god or cartoon mutt...it's still there out on the diminished perimeter of our solar system home and thereby special.



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 06:47 PM
link   
What's the problem with having 20 planets? So our kids' science tests become a little harder. Big deal. If it walks like a duck, talks like a duck, blah blah blah....



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 07:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Timeseer


Why are you so eager to agree that Pluto shouldn't be considered a planet? I mean the new definition of a planet would identify both the Earth and Jupiter as Dwarf Planets.


[edit on 24-8-2006 by Timeseer]


why would i be so eager to agree with cmdrkeenkid? lol, is that a rhetorical question? cmdrkeenkid knows the universe more then you know the back of your hand, that is why i would be eager to agree with him.

now you have me confused, if earth and jupiter are now dwarf planets, does that mean we have just 6 planets ? i think your might just be trolling here.


[edit on 24-8-2006 by elitegamer23]



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 07:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Vegemite

Originally posted by Timeseer

Originally posted by Vegemite
This is good. Pluto should have never been a planet


You should have never opened a science book. Cause you are killing science right now.

What gives you the right to say such ludicrous? Justify it even?


Umm becuase its silly to think of Pluto as a planet when its much more similar to Kuiper Belt Objects.


What Kuiper Belt Objects? Neptune? The Kuiper Belt Irregular Shape things similarly found in the asteroid belt?


Originally posted by Vegemite
Neptune isnt a KBO because Neptune destroys KBOs.


Pluto also destroys KBOs or should I say absorbs them. This just makes it more like Neptune is a KBO. Because KBOs always bombard one another... and those that are just too small like pebble are just instantly annihilated and absorbed.

So truly this just makes Neptune more of a KBO...


Originally posted by Vegemite
If Pluto could capture Neptune in its orbit like Neptune captured its moon Triton or Mars captured the asteroid Phobos then I might reconsider it.


What about Nix and Hydra? Aren't they captured satelites like Deimos and Phobos, they sure about as small as Deimos and Phobos?

And I'm sorry but what you had with Pluto capturing Neptune in orbit around it is just so damn stupid!

There are hundreds of trojans that in Jupiter's orbit that don't orbit around Jupiter. Does that make Jupiter not a planet? Well base on the current definition of a planet made by the Idiotic Astronomical Union it ought to be. Just like the Earth has several objects in its orbit that don't orbit around it. And don't you find it funny that even though Pluto orbits into Neptune's Orbit, it has never been captured as a satelite?

So PLEASE for the love of Newtons Laws stop posting senseless crap. Or atleast take the time to think of what you are speaking of... because you make those "whiny" children seem like geniuses.


Originally posted by Vegemite
You want me to reframe from speaking then you ask me a question? Whats that question even supposed to mean?


If you don't understand it then you have no right to speak about astronomy and other sciences for that matter. What I was talking about is social standings. The common man, the rich man, and the poor man. You know... social heirarchy... that thing you were taught about in high school when you taking history courses. At least I hope you were taking some history and political science courses.

What I am saying is that there are only about 400 scientists out the 10,000 astronomers from around the world and I've researched who those scientists are. And so far I've only found people with a LOT of money. Rich people, aristocrats, need I say more... But this isn't to be taking lightly, because rich people own this damn planet.

Capitalism anyone? You sure need to know what THAT is before you plan on criticizing me, senselessly.


Originally posted by Vegemite
Are you suggesting that planetary scientists are rich slobs with nothing better to do then to reclassify planets to upset whiny little children?


Whiny little children? The are only people whiny are those "planetary" scientists that are so eager to dismiss the Earth from being called a planet. You are aware that definition of a planet doesn't take the Earth and Jupiter into consideration. I sure as hell hope you are aware of how many trojans (tiny little objects) that are in the Earth's and Jupiter's orbits.

So no those little children are like future Newtons and Hawkings so to speak. It is retarded to speak offensive of the people that will become of the future generation. Why should you undermind their intellect, then they though younger than you are in fact correct when it comes to this subject. And where do you think these little guys are coming up with their ideas from? I mean if they are actually defining what a planet is on their own, then they should all be in college right now. Because no one back when I was kid was ever THAT smart. Well except for me of course... but that's different. Because I am a decendent to many very sophisticated people.

But to be serious, I believe those children get their ideas from their teachers and their parents. So the children are actually showwing the collective intellect of the common people. Why criticize that, when it is correct?



Originally posted by Vegemite
Yes I would. Just because a planet looks like a duck and acts like a duck doesnt make it a duck, because real planets run over ducks that are in their way.

That is a horrible analogy


It is horrible and another incorrect simile.

Maybe you should relate planet with stars or... cars...

By the way to make it fair we should have all those 10,000 astronomers together and vote and decide on the definition of a planet.

[edit on 24-8-2006 by Timeseer]



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 07:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by sardion2000
The Dwarf Planet designation for Pluto is logical and draws a distinction between the two types.


What two types? Asteroids and Jovian like planets? Asteroids and Stars? Asteroids and Terrestrial Planets? Asteroids and Brown Dwarfs? Asteroids and black holes? Asteroids and UFOs?

I think asteroids should be considered "Space Debris."

I don't think the term Dwarf Planet should be used to disquish Pluto from being a planet. I think it should distinquish Pluto from being called a Terrestrial "Earth-Like" Planet.



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 07:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by masqua

Originally posted by sardion2000
Woah, these geeky discussions do get intense




They sure seem to...


Planet or dwarf planet, ancient god or cartoon mutt...it's still there out on the diminished perimeter of our solar system home and thereby special.


So true. And there is one other thing too.
Pluto, does not even care!
Pluto doesn't even know that we call it Pluto!

On the other hand, I sort of wish this could have waited until NASA's New Horizons spacecraft, sailed past. There would have been much more support for the argument, one way or the other.



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 07:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by elitegamer23

why would i be so eager to agree with cmdrkeenkid?


Well I agree with those that are correct. I mean it is quite obvious that the IAU doesn't know of the asteroids in Jupiter's orbit.


Originally posted by elitegamer23
lol, is that a rhetorical question?


Why do you sound like a 14 year old that you are likely to find at newgrounds.


Originally posted by elitegamer23
cmdrkeenkid knows the universe more then you know the back of your hand, that is why i would be eager to agree with him.


Oh really? Do you have proof? Because it seems like neither you nor what's his name know anything within regards to astronomy.

Quick question... does Jupiter have a surface of anykind?


Originally posted by elitegamer23
now you have me confused, if earth and jupiter are now dwarf planets, does that mean we have just 6 planets ?


Actually it would have just two. Mercury and Venus, because every other planet has trojans of some kind in its orbit.


Originally posted by elitegamer23
i think your might just be trolling here.


I am sorry but arguing is not trolling. So stop being such a baby about it. (I mean grow up some... and don't be so sensitive to pity words.)

Let me identify to you what trolling is...

Trolling is when you actively and surely make an attempt to anger someone... provoking a flame war. Or simply making offensive topics or topics that don't hold the same information within in that is asserted in the title.

That is trolling... do you see me doing any of that? Well if I'm making you angry, then I'm sorry. I didn't know I was offending you.


Originally posted by spacedoubt

Originally posted by masqua

Originally posted by sardion2000
Woah, these geeky discussions do get intense




They sure seem to...


Planet or dwarf planet, ancient god or cartoon mutt...it's still there out on the diminished perimeter of our solar system home and thereby special.


So true. And there is one other thing too.
Pluto, does not even care!
Pluto doesn't even know that we call it Pluto!

On the other hand, I sort of wish this could have waited until NASA's New Horizons spacecraft, sailed past. There would have been much more support for the argument, one way or the other.


You are indeed the most intelligent person here. They should have waited till Nasa had done its research on the "thing."

masqua, why was I warned about making one sentenced replies when no else takes time to take in regard to that "rule." Is it some form of discrimination? Because when I try talking to people, they just tell to be quiet about it and mind my own business, even though they make one line replies.

[edit on 24-8-2006 by Timeseer]



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 08:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Timeseer


I am sorry but arguing is not trolling. So stop being such a baby about it.

Let me identify to you what trolling is...

Trolling is when you actively and surely make an attempt to anger someone... provoking a flame war. Or simply making offensive topics or topics that don't hold the same information within in that is asserted in the title.



[edit on 24-8-2006 by Timeseer]


your calling me a baby but your not trolling.


read YOUR deffinition. only a troll would know such a detailed deffinition . why argue anyways, why not try discussing it. it shows more intelligence.



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 08:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by elitegamer23

your calling me a baby but your not trolling.


Yep... calling you a baby isn't trolling... It is no different than calling you a troll. Which is what you did to me. But your statement right there seems rather like trolling to me. Since it is rather provoking in the flaming war sort of way.

If I called you a little whiny bastard then I would be flaming you.

But still I am not trolling... because I am not provoking you to flame. I am telling you to act a little bit more mature. And that is what statement means.


Originally posted by elitegamer23
read YOUR deffinition. only a troll would know such a detailed deffinition . why argue anyways, why not try discussing it. it shows more intelligence.


Well I wouldn't be "arguing" right now... if you weren't so eager to argue in the first place. You do see the word, arguing in quotations now do you?

And for your information, I'm debating so far, not arguing. You are arguing and I'm debating... kind of strange that you continue to think that I am arguing too.

And by the way... actually anyone would know such a detailed definition if they spend a lot of time reading up rules and insuring that they know what they are.

[edit on 24-8-2006 by Timeseer]



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 08:18 PM
link   
wow, someone just got owned.


i told my kid today pluto was no longer a planet. to think i was filling her head with bs all these years . peace



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 09:01 PM
link   
dang, i saw your post disappear , so i was hoping you disappeared. i guess you didnt get owned
maybe i just went on your ignore list.



Originally posted by Timeseer


I am sorry but arguing is not trolling.


[edit on 24-8-2006 by Timeseer]

well make up your mind, are you arguing like you said you were, or what?

i dont see people with your attitude having a long life on ats, so ill just be patient,troll boy.

now i want to apologize to everyone on this thread for becoming a distraction, sorry, ill quit it now.

to get back on topic .... what are the chances that the planet formerly known as pluto will get its status back? normal people seem to want it to stay a planet.

[edit on 24-8-2006 by elitegamer23]

[edit on 24-8-2006 by elitegamer23]



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 09:37 PM
link   
Alright you lot, keep it civil and spread more love.

I want to see at least 40% more hearting in this thread.

Thank you.




posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 09:46 PM
link   
I'm suprised...I didn't think they would actually demote Pluto.

I do agree with there decision...It seems the only people who dont like it are the ones who know nothing of Pluto, and think it deserves its planet status just because its being called in fot 70+ years.



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 09:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Timeseer

Originally posted by Vegemite
Neptune isnt a KBO because Neptune destroys KBOs.


Pluto also destroys KBOs or should I say absorbs them. This just makes it more like Neptune is a KBO. Because KBOs always bombard one another... and those that are just too small like pebble are just instantly annihilated and absorbed.

So truly this just makes Neptune more of a KBO...


Originally posted by Vegemite
If Pluto could capture Neptune in its orbit like Neptune captured its moon Triton or Mars captured the asteroid Phobos then I might reconsider it.


What about Nix and Hydra? Aren't they captured satelites like Deimos and Phobos, they sure about as small as Deimos and Phobos?

And I'm sorry but what you had with Pluto capturing Neptune in orbit around it is just so damn stupid!

There are hundreds of trojans that in Jupiter's orbit that don't orbit around Jupiter. Does that make Jupiter not a planet? Well base on the current definition of a planet made by the Idiotic Astronomical Union it ought to be. Just like the Earth has several objects in its orbit that don't orbit around it. And don't you find it funny that even though Pluto orbits into Neptune's Orbit, it has never been captured as a satelite?

So PLEASE for the love of Newtons Laws stop posting senseless crap. Or atleast take the time to think of what you are speaking of... because you make those "whiny" children seem like geniuses.

Im going to respond to this with an excerpt, hopefully its not to technical for you.


The end product of secondary disc accretion is a small number of relatively large bodies(planets) in either non intersecting or resonant orbits, which prevent collisions between them. Asteriods and comets(including KBOs, differ from planets because they can collide with eachother and other planets


You can read the full article thru this its a very good article and explains my position and the IAUs very clearly and you will see that the classification is quite appropriate



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 09:49 PM
link   
Dear Pluto,

You will always have a fond place in our hearts as the planet that never was, and I enjoyed every speculation and discovery about you over many years.

The people of Earth just find it strange that you do this wierd dance with Charon like two planets locked in an embrace. You can't turn away, and neither of you is the moon.
(not that there's anything wrong with that...) :shk:

You know the old saying, "What goes on in the Kuiper Belt stays in the Kuiper Belt"
(unless you tell the Oort Cloud....)


This debate probably would not have happened if you hadn't packed your kit and left in 1999. You spent 20 glorious years as the 8th planet, but your trans-Neptunian nature has put a lot of people off.

You have the next 200+ years to think about your decision, and upon your return we will make every effort to welcome you back to the bossom of the planetary system.

Good-bye Pluto
We loved you
anxietydisorder........




P.S. - If you could do something about your eccentric orbit, or even correct your inclination a bit, perhaps mankind would not be so judgemental.
Just a suggestion. anx.....



[edit on 24/8/2006 by anxietydisorder]



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 09:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Murcielago
I'm suprised...I didn't think they would actually demote Pluto.

I do agree with there decision...It seems the only people who dont like it are the ones who know nothing of Pluto, and think it deserves its planet status just because its being called in fot 70+ years.







it should keep its place in our heavens as a planet just simply because we have brainwashed so many generations into believing its a planet. why not add a simple rule to their guidelines of what makes up a planet.
the rule would state, if you have been called a planet for over 50 years , u are a planet.

[edit on 24-8-2006 by elitegamer23]

[edit on 24-8-2006 by elitegamer23]




top topics



 
0
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join