Comments on: States have Rights, but I don’t think this is one of them

By: linlin

linlin — Sun, 22 Apr 2007 03:05:29 +0000

i think, pluto is still a mystery to us. any pre-classification probably prove later a big joke.

as for the legislature, i don’t think they know anything about science, astronomy….

By: Laurel Kornfeld

Laurel Kornfeld — Wed, 11 Apr 2007 05:03:37 +0000

In no way are supporters of Pluto’s planethood similar to creationists. Science has NOT sufficiently established a definition of the term planet on which experts can agree nor has a consensus of astronomers agreed that evidence shows without a shadow of doubt that Pluto does not meet the qualification for planethood. Instead, we have a divide with some of the leading planetary scientists in the world rejecting the IAU definition and the exclusion of Pluto as a planet. That’s hardly co-opting scientific ideas to arrive at a pre-selected conclusion. If anything here is to be questioned, it is the political and highly surreptitious process by which a fraction of the IAU, mostly not planetary scientists, presumed to make a decision for not only their entire field, but for the whole world.

By: Stephen Uitti

Stephen Uitti — Mon, 19 Mar 2007 19:05:20 +0000

…brontosaurus isn’t a dinosaur?

According to this:
http://www.unmuseum.org/dinobront.htm
… the brontosaurus is alive and well, as a synonym. I still don’t see how the name apotosaurus should have priority.

The story i’d heard was this: The apotosaurus body was mated to the skull of a Camarasaurus. The animal got renamed when this mistake was discovered. This story makes sense, but doesn’t really cover it.

Really, the issues, the Brontosaurus, and Pluto, are similar. Politics, and hyperbola, not reason, have guided decisions.

My interpretations of the new IAU definition of the word “planet” lead to one of two results.

1. There are no planets in our solar system.

2. Only Jupiter is a planet. It’s the big bully. Nothing else matters.

By: andy.s

andy.s — Tue, 13 Mar 2007 22:31:25 +0000

That was a bill in the Indiana legislature in the 19th century.
I don’t think it ever got out of committee.

See the Straight Dope website.

By: Andy

Andy — Mon, 12 Mar 2007 20:37:02 +0000

Was it New Mexico that once ruled that the value of pi was four? Or was it Ohio?

By: Sacha

Sacha — Mon, 12 Mar 2007 04:19:57 +0000

Apparently the Fiscal Impact of the bill was “NFI”. Seems fairly accurate.

By: Risa

Risa — Sun, 11 Mar 2007 05:51:19 +0000

My favorite comment on this was on a T-shirt that my cousin’s 8th grade academic team created — “That’s okay, Pluto. I’m not a planet either”.

By: Amara

Amara — Fri, 09 Mar 2007 23:54:35 +0000

Upon applying the dynamic definitions set in Prague last August, not only is Pluto not a planet, but Earth is not a planet, Mars is not a planet, Jupiter is not a planet, and neither is Neptune.

Anyone up for writing this entry in Conservapedia?

By: New Mexico’s Planet « any illimitable star

New Mexico’s Planet « any illimitable star — Fri, 09 Mar 2007 16:29:41 +0000

[...] Mexico’s Planet Jump to Comments Apparently, the New Mexico Legislature has declared Pluto to be a planet when it’s over theNew Mexican sky. As the science blog Cosmic Variance points out, it’s a “remarkable display of scientific federalism.” [...]

By: Navneeth

Navneeth — Fri, 09 Mar 2007 08:11:10 +0000

We gave up the brontosaurus without a whimper.

Now that this info is out on the internet, in one of the popular (science) blogs, with silly news media all around us, we’re probably going to witness a delay…ed hue and cry on this issue.