Thursday, June 11, 2009

I have similar feelings to Kenny on that because of tradition I want to say that Pluto should be a planet. But as I look further into this topic and read what the other contributors thought i believe that Pluto should stay declassified. I mean science was so generic in the time of Pluto's discovery. Many people think that because so many people today know Pluto as the 9th planet that we should keep it as a planet but it is like calling someone Joe for 5 years then realizing there name is Harry. Would you still call him Joe? Most people wouldn't. Just because we have called it a planet for so long means no reason why it should still be a planet.

Wednesday, June 10, 2009

In my mind Pluto will always remain as one of the nine planets. Science should have left well enough alone in this case, leaving iconic Pluto as a normal planet. Especially when you take into considration that Pluto barely misses the criteara for being a normal planet, in my mind it sounds a bit nitpicky to change something well known based on a few miniscule details. As Caroline stated 'whos to say we are no a dwarf planet?' Like us Pluto has moons in its orbit, and in contrast we are also look very miniscule when compared to some of the much larger planets in our solar system. Although Im not pleased about the declasification, whats done is done, to change it back now would seem foolish.

Tuesday, June 9, 2009

Much more eloquent... :)

I personally believe Pluto should be classified as a planet, not just because I have grown up with it as a planet during my childhood, but who defines what a planet is and what is not. Sure, Pluto is small and insignificant, but who's to say that hypothetically, Earth is dwarf planet in comparison to others in our galaxy and universe. Perhaps aliens are looking at our planet and commenting on how Earth is a minuscule and is not significant in any way! I think not. Besides, who decided that Pluto fits the definition of a dwarf planet when the scientific community hasn't even come close to observing a tiny fraction of the forms in space? Pluto even goes above and beyond to have its own moon (not mentioning that the moon and Pluto's gravity pull each other!) I think before we start classifying planets on whether they are a planet or not, we need to discover more and more about all the intergalactic bodies around us.

Monday, June 8, 2009


I extremely believe that Pluto should in fact be a planet. This "criteria" established by certain scientists is entirely subjective, there is no reason to have certain rules that make pluto not a planet. Why not just work the opposite way and use this criteria for a sub classification of planets. Like "Super" Planets or "These are Deffinetely Planets" Planets. I think that sure science is always changing, but it's seems a little ridiculous that scientist need to downsize Pluto, don't they have better things to do? Like solve our polution problems, or find water on other planets? In conclusion why not let tradition win once in a while?
Well, tradition is important to society but I'm not sure it should be allowed to override science in this case. Think about future generations. Sure, we grew up with Pluto as a planet, but if we tell our children that Pluto is a planet, even though by scientific definition it's not, then all we're doing is teaching a lie. I don't think future generations should be taught falsities because we're too uncomfortable with deviations from tradition. Part of the beauty of science is that it is always changing. If we don't accept the changes in perspective that science brings to the modern world than we might as well go back to the days of Galileo when tradition prevented the advancement of science completely.

Sunday, June 7, 2009

In my opinion, we should keep Pluto as a planet. I did my 4th grade (or maybe 3rd) project on Pluto and have grown up "believing" in Pluto. In a sense it is like giving someone an award and then taking it away because you later realized that you gave it to the wrong person, or they didn't meet all of the qualifications. Instead the person should give the award to both the recipient and the accidental recipient.....back to Pluto: I think Pluto should remain a planet for tradition sake and Eris should become a new planet. Although science was not as advanced in the past and Pluto was mistakenly named a planet it can still be called a planet, and we will all know it doesn't meet the third requirement. But it is the smallest planet so therefore it should be given a little flexibility....right?! :)


I'll take the other position in this argument:

Sometimes, tradition is necessary in a field dictated by laws, classification, and analysis. From its discovery in 1930 to its declassification in 2006, Pluto was considered a planet. It was a part of the Original 9, a staple of astrologic knowledge for millions upon millions of kindergarteners. In order to prevent our civilization from almost certain collapse, we must reinstate Pluto's Planetary Status. Thank you.

But, all future "discoveries" must be judged by the proper criteria.



I feel its necessary to classify Pluto as a dwarf planet despite tradition. According to new findings in science it no longer falls under the modern classification of a planet. I don't believe you should stick to a certain way of thinking just for the sake of tradition. Sure tradition is important but there's a certain point where people need to think about why they're sticking to it. Just because you were taught to believe a certain way all your life doesn't mean you're views are permanent and not subject to change. Its better to change your views than continue living a lie.
I don't think Pluto should be classified as a planet. If it doesn't meet the criteria then it's not a dubbed 'Planet'. If Price Charles was in a coma would you let him be King? No, he doesn't have the qualfications to rule. Science trumps tradition.


Although tradition makes me want to say that we should put Pluto back into the "planet classification", science, I feel, takes precedence. We did not have the technology we have today back when we decided who was a planet and who wasn't. From what I have read it almost seemed like that if it was pretty big, and it went around the sun it was a planet. Now that we can observe many more bodies out in space that orbit our sun, and with the given example of Eris that is larger than Pluto, we would have to be all inclusive and include Eris as well, or keep the classification as is. Plus, we wouldn't want our kids to have to memorize many more planets than necessary right?

Wednesday, June 3, 2009


In 2006 Pluto was announced to be a dwarf planet because it did not meet the proper criteria for being a planet. International Astronomical Union (IAU) states that in the Solar System a planet is a celestial body that:
1. is in orbit around the Sun,
2. has sufficient mass to assume hydrostatic equilibrium (a nearly round shape), and
3. has "cleared the neighborhood" around its orbit.
Since Pluto does not meet the 3rd planet requirement it was deemed a dwarf planet. Since then the IAU has discovered a new and larger dwarf planet named Eris. Do you feel that it is necessary to classify Pluto as a dwarf planet for sake of science? OR Should we reclassify it as a planet for the sake of tradition? Please explain answer thoroughly and choose one definitive side.