<p>whatever you say..but it's still a dumb thing to do. Pluto should stay in the solar system</p>
<p>yeah, whatever. i really don't care about it that much. i mean, really. it's pluto. did we ever care?</p>
<p>but i liked it better when e had 9 planets
8 is such s stupid number</p>
<p>Go Taurus We R Bulls Yo</p>
<p>Although Pluto has been stripped off its planet title, it doesn't mean that it's no longer a part of our solar system. In fact, it has been renamed as one of the "dwarf planets", which include asteroids, comets, etc that also inhabit our solar system. I personally support the decision because there'll await many more pluto-like bodies, perhaps dozens or hundreds, to be discovered very soon in the future. It is necessary that a definition of a planet be redefined (if a coherent definition was even made until now).</p>
<p>Using the search feature to avoid quadruple posts is highly underrated.</p>
<p>but why now? I mean, it has been called a planet for nearly 40 years. There is no need to suddenly decide to just get rid of it.</p>
<p>If Pluto gets to be a planet, though, all of the Kuiper Belt objects bigger than Pluto have to be considered planets, too. And there might be a lot of them. So...yeah. I look kind of nerdy now, don't I?</p>
<p>Not really. You are in CC. Nerd capital of the world. Don't mind the tens of millions of EC's they do. Its a ll a front</p>
<p>I don't know anything about planets. I just saw this on the news and was disappointed becasue it was not the right thing to do.</p>
<p>
[quote]
but why now? I mean, it has been called a planet for nearly 40 years. There is no need to suddenly decide to just get rid of it.
[/quote]
When Pluto was first discovered in 1930 (so it's been a planet for 76 years until now), it was hailed as a planet and thought to be bigger than Mercury because we knew of nothing else in the farthest parts of the Solar System. Then as we could see more things out there, it was discovered that Pluto was completely different than the other planets: they realized a lot of its percieved size was due to its moon Charon (it has two others, for the record), meaning Pluto is smaller than our own Moon!, so it no longer had size going for it. Things unravelled further when the first Kuiper Belt Objects were discovered in the past decade or so, basically big chunks of ice and rock beyond Neptune sort of like our asteroid belt, and it was pretty apparent that Pluto had more in common with these objects then with the planets. To top it off, one of these rocks discovered last summer was found to be bigger than Pluto, so there was officially nothing special about it anymore that was planet-worthy.
So basically the point of all this is that science changes and what we first thought of the Solar System in the 1930s needed to be updated to what we know it to be like today. This happens all the time in all parts of science so it's not really a big deal in that sense, and it's mainly annoying because we need a new mnemonic! ;)</p>
<p>Pluto: Size doesn't matter. its what on the inside that counts</p>
<p>I think some people have way too much time on their hands</p>
<p>why does a planet have to be a "heavenly body" (in terms of size)?
Many tiny things are very important, while big things are just useless pieces of crap.</p>
<p>Tell Jupiter that in his face. You won't live very long</p>
<p>Its Iuppiter.</p>
<p>Jupiter is a waste of space..making all the planets feel bad because of its fat ass.</p>
<p>Jupiter is spelled with double p. hm...</p>
<p>Who made this stupid thread anyway. It SUCKS</p>
<p>THAT'S IT!!!! THAT'S ALL THE HORRIBLE STUFF YOU WANTED TO SAY!</p>
<p>I must say that I am disappointed in you..youcan be alot meaner than that.</p>