Chris A : “Third, you are apparently claiming not to be the same Steve R. who posts passionately against the IAU’s Pluto decision on Dome-L, the planetarium professionals’ list serve, often using CAPITALS to emphasize his points, and using some of the exact same arguments and syntax, and often rife with spelling and grammatical errors. Whatever, it matters not.”

Yes, I am indeed saying that wasn’t me at least I’m pretty sure its not. It is true that I’ve posted these arguments before but mostly on the Bad Astronomy thread and NOT in capitals. (well okay perhaps just the odd word in capitals but not more than the odd word.)

The Dome-L planetarium profesionals listserve does NOT ring any bells at all for me. When was this if I may ask? My tag is usually StevoR – with an ‘o’ and no space before the R and NOT Steve with an “e” and space before the capital R so we probably have a case of mistaken identity. Steve is a pretty common name .. Or maybe the person was giving me credit for my article (My X points showing why Pluto is a planet?) and you got confused there? You may want to check again. Esp. before you launch into any
more ad hominanm attacks.

“Second, if you’ve rebutted Steve Soter’s paper, I have yet to see it. Please direct me to where I can read your rebuttal.”

It was on one of these threads where Pluto’s planetary status was debated
on the Bad Astronomy /Discover blitzfeed thingummy. I’ll have to go back & find the thread and link it here myself – one of the more recent of many …

Suffice to say I did read the paper and was very far from convinced it was either clear or reasonable as a definition as it seemed arbitary – just Soter’s view & who is this Soter that his view should overide that of many others who disagree with him eg. say Alan S. Stern? It also struck me as
being full of obscure techno-babble terminology rather than saying anything
in plain, comprehensible english and thus is hard to comprehend for the average person on the street and especially for non-anti-Plutoneans like myself!

Chris A : “Third, you are apparently claiming not to be the same Steve R. who posts passionately against the IAU’s Pluto decision on Dome-L, the planetarium professionals’ list serve, often using CAPITALS to emphasize his points, and using some of the exact same arguments and syntax, and often rife with spelling and grammatical errors. Whatever, it matters not.”

Yes, I am claiming that wasn’t me at least I’m pretty sure its not It is true that I’ve posted these arguments before but mostly on the Bad Astronomy thread and NOT in capitals. (well okay perhaps just the odd word in capitals but not more than the odd word.)

The Dome-L planetarium profesionals listserve does NOT ring any bells at all for me. When was this if I may ask? My tag is usually StevoR – with an ‘o’ and no space before the R and NOT Steve with an “e” and space before the capital R so we probably have a case of mistaken identity. Steve is a pretty common name .. Or maybe the person was giving me credit for my article (My X points showing why Pluto is a planet?) and you got confused there? You may want to check again. Esp. before you launch into any
more ad hominanm attacks ..

Chris A : “This is all evidence of arguing from emotion, not logic. Changing the label we choose to refer to Pluto is not “anti-Pluto.” Pluto is not harmed in any way.”

Actually I think science and, especially astronomy, is harmed by this. Its reputation suffers when it appears – as I’ve stated earlier – that astronomers can’t tell a planet if they’re standing on one! Morover, if they need to refer to an obscure academic paper to explain what the word means its seems well a bit emabarasasing and silly frankly. Its like a mathematican not being able to tell you what a numeral is or a biologist what an animal is.

As for harm coming to Pluto – I guess its reputation – along with that of the IAU is in question. Do planets have reputations – well perhaps not that that they know about it no, but in the sense that we know about them, yes!

Chris A : “There is nothing “proper” about a planet or “improper” about a KBO (or asteroid, or comet, or dwarf planet, or…). To suggest this is purely emotional, and based not at all on logic or reason.

Except in terms of definition. I’ve used lots of logic – reductio ad absurdum as well as using logical consistiency (eg. dwarf star = proper star that is called and counted as a star therefore ..) as well as yes some emotion. I think there is a place for using both in making arguments. Outside of the narrow confines of a logic or maths classroom you’re going to find there is an emotional component to everything.

Chris A : “I have nothing “against” Pluto. To suggest that I do implies that I, like you, have some sort of emotional relationship with it.”

Yes, I do get the distinct sense that you are emotional against Pluto – you seem unreasonably hostile to the idea that Pluto is a genuine planet along with Eris, Ceres, Neptune, Earth and Jupiter! Pluto in fact has more in common with Earth than Earth has in common with Jupiter! To quote Darth Vader : “Search your feelings you know it to be true!”

So I’ll ask again – what particular reason do you, Chris A have to be so hostile and dead set against Pluto? Are you anti-American and wish to not be reminded of Clyde Tombaugh’s very proudly American achievement in his
discovering that world? Do you have a crush on some crazed orbital dynamicist or did you once have a feud with Alan Stern or ..well what? What possible reason do you have for your evident hatred of this fascinating little planet?

Chris A : “It’s {Pluto} one of a thousand similar, small balls of ice and rock, for crying out loud.”

No and here you’re emotional bias is clear. Pluto is NOT just one of many -it is the first Kuiper Belt object to be found, the brightest, the second-largest, (far larger than all but a handful of others and even Eris only
beats it by a very small fraction), the most famous and culturally significant, the prototype for its class, a world that has 3 moons (more
than any other TNO /KBO /Plutino /whatever y’call’em! I think) and so forth. The discovery of many other ice dwarf type planets and Kuiper
Belt / Oort Cloud asteroids makes Pluto no less significant and less a
planet than the discovery of other exo-Jupiters makes our Jupiter less a
planet!

Chris A : “Is a mountain “better” than a hill?”

Ask a mountainer! They’ll tell you – yes! “Better” is of course a subjective term that depends on what you want to do but in this case the dwarf planet term seems to disciminate unfairly against smaller planets so yes I’d say planet is better than mere dwarf. Oh and has anyone used the IAU’s silly “classical planet” term outside of this debate yet? Anyone at all?

“If someone wants to reclassify Greenland as a continent, does that make them “pro-Greenland?”

Yes! I’d say so. In fact I’d suspect such a person was probably from the
Greenland tourism bureau ..

Second, if you’ve rebutted Steve Soter’s paper, I have yet to see it. Please direct me to where I can read your rebuttal.

Third, you are apparently claiming not to be the same Steve R. who posts passionately against the IAU’s Pluto decision on Dome-L, the planetarium professionals’ list serve, often using CAPITALS to emphasize his points, and using some of the exact same arguments and syntax, and often rife with spelling and grammatical errors. Whatever, it matters not.

Fourth, my “accusation” that you are threatening to hold your breath until you turn blue was, to anyone with a functioning sense of sarcasm (as you claim to possess), obviously sarcasm. But you knew that.

Fifth, and this one is the most significant: I have called your arguments emotional, and you have claimed that it is merely your presentation style, not the arguments themselves, which are emotional.

Allow me to quote you:

1) “Have you even thought about how many other better definitions…were…rejected…by the anti-Plutonean lobby?”

2) “…why should a dwarf planet be dismissed from being a proper planet?”

3) “Where are you coming from and what do you have against Pluto anyway ..?”

This is all evidence of arguing from emotion, not logic. Changing the label we choose to refer to Pluto is not “anti-Pluto.” Pluto is not harmed in any way. It doesn’t lose is parking space, corner office, or dental plan. Nor is calling Pluto a planet “pro-Pluto.” Pluto is a ball of ice and rock. It is incapable of being harmed or helped by what we call it.

There is nothing “proper” about a planet or “improper” about a KBO (or asteroid, or comet, or dwarf planet, or…). To suggest this is purely emotional, and based not at all on logic or reason.

I have nothing “against” Pluto. To suggest that I do implies that I, like you, have some sort of emotional relationship with it. It’s one of a thousand similar, small balls of ice and rock, for crying out loud. Is a mountain “better” than a hill? If someone wants to reclassify Greenland as a continent, does that make them “pro-Greenland?”

Read the paper, present your objections, and we can discuss. Until then, it’s wasted bandwidth.

Sometimes you get the acronymns,sometimes they get you!

Cheers!