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.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

A theory of why Pluto is no longer a planet.

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 6 2010 @ 06:19 AM
link   
We all know that Pluto is no longer a planet which leaves us with only 8 planets now. it is obviously a debate on whether or not Pluto really is a planet and why it was called a planet in the first place. Anyways... We all have heard about Planet X which is the supposed 10th planet. Could they have removed Pluto from the name as a planet to leave only 8 planets so that in the future(presumably this century) they will name another planet beyond Pluto and to ignore the argument that the newly found planet is 'Planet X'. We all know if they made the announcement that there is another planet people would say, "We knew there was a Planet X and we are all going to die!". So in order to avoid the hysteria they just wait untill it passes and then announce 'Planet X' which will actually be the 9th planet.

I would love some feedback.




posted on Mar, 6 2010 @ 06:31 AM
link   
I thought Pluto was reclassified to a minor planet due to the fact that it is actually part of the Kuiper Belt, where there similar bodies to Pluto that are not considered planets. It didn't make much logical sense having Pluto classified as a planet of our solar system and not the others.

Found this;


The issue was brought to a head by the discovery of Eris, an object in the scattered disc far beyond the Kuiper belt, that is now known to be 27 percent more massive than Pluto.[77] In response, the International Astronomical Union (IAU), was forced to define a planet for the first time, and in so doing included in their definition that a planet must have "cleared the neighbourhood around its orbit."[78] As Pluto shared its orbit with so many KBOs, it was deemed not to have cleared its orbit, and was thus reclassified from a planet to a member of the Kuiper belt.


en.wikipedia.org...

[edit on 6-3-2010 by fumanchu]



posted on Mar, 6 2010 @ 06:47 AM
link   
Even if Pluto is considered a planet or not in Astrology it is still taken into account as other celestial bodies are...wether it is officially declared planet or not is less relevant methinks...



posted on Mar, 6 2010 @ 07:04 AM
link   
The term Planet X was originally used to described a planet predicted to exist beyond the orbit of Neptune. After much searching it was eventually discovered in 1930. And named ................ Pluto.

Pluto is the 2nd largest of the many bodies now known to orbit beyond Neptune (the largest is Eris, discovered in 2005)

If Pluto were still designated a planet, then Eris - being larger - would also be a planet and thus the 10th in the solar system. But were that the case, what about Makemake or Haumea? That'd make 12 planets ...... And then there's Quaoar and Sedna and Orcus and ........ well that's why Pluto was redesignated a dwarf planet. It just keeps it simple.

[edit on 6-3-2010 by Essan]



posted on Mar, 6 2010 @ 07:43 AM
link   
I don't think there would be widespread public unrest of any kind because NASA announced the finding of a tenth planet (even if, as stated above, this had not already happened).

Few people would even hear about it (you'd be surprised how little the average American schmuck knows about astronomy; they tune things like that out), far fewer would be familiar with the concept of "Planet X" and its supposed dangerous attributes, and only a tiny percentage of these very few people would panic at the announcement of the mere discovery of a new planet.

On the other hand, if it were announced that another planet were hurtling toward Earth on a collision course (or near enough that tidal forces would do just as much damage as an actual impact), nobody would care what number the incoming planet is. It wouldn't make a difference to very many people at all whether the planet coming to destroy our own was planet X, planet IX, or planet LCVII.

Pluto was reclassified because a large segment of the scientific community (particularly in disproportionately theory-heavy areas like astronomy and cosmology) gets hung up on taxonomy and the practice of renaming old things, rather than endeavoring to discover new ones. Compared to securing the funding and doing the work toward a truly significant experiment or discovery, this is a quick and easy way of immortalizing one's name in the future of science.

There's no grand coverup here, just a few scientists who wanted to be remembered and didn't work in a field with a whole lot of new things to be discovered, at least not in our immediate stellar neighborhood. Even if there is a Planet X out there, with a vastly eccentric 32,000-year orbital period, which brings about a mass extinction on Earth each time it passes by, people would not show one bit more restraint in their panic whether or not it was called Planet X when it was announced.



posted on Mar, 6 2010 @ 08:26 AM
link   
reply to post by Misoir
 




Could they have removed Pluto from the name as a planet to leave only 8 planets so that in the future(presumably this century) they will name another planet beyond Pluto and to ignore the argument that the newly found planet is 'Planet X'.


Almost there buddy!! Most likely NASA recess Pluto 'cos Nibiru's pulled it away from its orbit, I mean, the last 3.600 years orbit. Or maybe it just was dragged by Nibiru and now is one of its moons or part of the cluster.
Just for this matter... I've regarding the possibility of HAARP farms spread around the world, are part of a global defense gear, to increase our magnetosphere and attempt to decrease the damages of Nibiru approaching. Am I talking bullsh*t or being reasonable??



posted on Mar, 6 2010 @ 08:31 AM
link   
Why does it matter how we classify it? Whatever the human race decides to call it or how we decide to classify it is really of no importance. It will remain as it has once we are gone, just like it was before we recognized it's existence.

This isn't the conspiracy your looking for,... move along.



posted on Mar, 6 2010 @ 08:36 AM
link   
People on this site amaze me. Terrible thread. Please close this non-sense.



posted on Mar, 6 2010 @ 08:38 AM
link   
reply to post by Misoir
 


Because we'd have to either classify several other icy-rocky bodies discovered out in the Kuiper Belt and Oort Cloud as planets, so instead we rename Pluto to a dwarf planet. Actually it's the second biggest dwarf planet discovered, and many more are likely to be discovered around a similar size.

Although they're still worthy of study, and New Horizons will be the first probe to be arrive at Pluto soon



[edit on 6-3-2010 by john124]



posted on Oct, 9 2015 @ 07:14 PM
link   
Its been at least 10 years since larger planetoids (Eris, MakeMake, Nibiru) have come into the public spotlight and indeed downgrading pluto to non-planet status helped qualm 'Ahah's that there are progressively bigger outer planets once the public is ready for binary system disclosure.



posted on Oct, 10 2015 @ 05:31 AM
link   
Let it never be forgotten that Pluto was demoted as a planet on the vote of a minority of astronomers who stayed behind at the Closing Ceremony of the IAU on 24 August, 2006 after their colleagues had gone home. It was done purely out of convenience in order to make claims of detection of new planets easier to assess. It was defined out of existence as a planet. Many astronomers want this decision reversed because they regard it ludicrous that an object should not be regarded as a planet merely because its mass and position happen to be similar to that found for Trans-Neptunian Objects. It was not science but convenience pure and simple involving a change of definition by a committee that caused Pluto to be demoted as a planet. That plus pure speculation about how Pluto came into its present orbit.

The fact is, an object cannot be called a planet or dwarf planet based purely on its mass. That's done merely to resolve controvercy amongst astronomers, but it leaves the question of whether the object formed along with the large planets unsettled by avoiding the issue with a change of definition. And they call this science?
edit on 10-10-2015 by micpsi because: Typo corrected.



posted on Oct, 10 2015 @ 05:41 AM
link   
I think Pluto should be considered a planet, maybe in a couple of decades when we have more info we could declassify it.







 
0

log in

join