Thursday, July 9, 2009

Fears of a Pluto Fan, OR, “oh, may we pray, the author was not defacting as he IM'd” –Randall Nichols in an IM

“Science can't make Pluto not a planet. They've had Pluto as a planet for centuries. You can't do scientific backsies. That's nuts. What if other things they've been telling us forever turn out to be untrue? What if that polio vaccine isn't a permanent fix? What if not all cholesterol is bad for us? What if the universe is expanding? What if... what if none of the stuff they currently tell me to believe is real? Not only does this destroy my worldview, but all those labs the government subsidized were just wasting my tax money! I could have bought porn with that money!"


  1. Pluto was not a planet for centuries. It was a planet for less than 100 years.

  2. The speaker is apparently ignorant about "good cholesterol" and that various polio vaccines do wear off. He is also apparently unaware that the universe is expanding.

  3. Pluto is still a planet. Only four percent of the IAU voted on the controversial demotion, and most are not planetary scientists. Their decision was immediately opposed in a formal petition by hundreds of professional astronomers led by Dr. Alan Stern, Principal Investigator of NASA’s New Horizons mission to Pluto. One reason the IAU definition makes no sense is it says dwarf planets are not planets at all! That is like saying a grizzly bear is not a bear, and it is inconsistent with the use of the term “dwarf” in astronomy, where dwarf stars are still stars, and dwarf galaxies are still galaxies. Also, the IAU definition classifies objects solely by where they are while ignoring what they are. If Earth were in Pluto’s orbit, according to the IAU definition, it would not be a planet either. A definition that takes the same object and makes it a planet in one location and not a planet in another is essentially useless. Pluto is a planet because it is spherical, meaning it is large enough to be pulled into a round shape by its own gravity--a state known as hydrostatic equilibrium and characteristic of planets, not of shapeless asteroids held together by chemical bonds. These reasons are why many astronomers, lay people, and educators are either ignoring the demotion entirely or working to get it overturned. I am a writer and amateur astronomer and proud to be one of these people. You can read more about why Pluto is a planet and worldwide efforts to overturn the demotion on my Pluto Blog at

  4. is a backsie like a mulligan in golf?

    don't pay any attention to those dweeps.

    btw if you can't find free porn on the web, you're not trying hard enough!


Counter est. March 2, 2008