OK no more Pluto? Is any one bummed about this or is it just the breaks in the hard cruel world of science?

Question

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/23/science/space/23pluto.html?ref=science

Answer 1

of course i'm bummed. I think the original definition was much better. If go out and ask people what a planet is, i guaranteed almost everybody's gonna say a 'roudn object that orbits the sun' and that is what pluto, ceres, xena, sedna, vesta and hygiea and all the others is.
I think the scientist is even having this discussion is because they think there is too many planets coming, rather than what really defines a planet.

Answer 2

I AM a little bummed, but it IS the hard cruel world of science. The first and largest asteroid, Ceres, was called a planet when it was first discovered in 1801, but was demoted to the newly created category of asteroid about 50 years later when everyone realized how small it was, and other even smaller ones were discovered. The same should have happened to Pluto, which was discovered 66 years ago, but it took much longer to measure its true size and discover more and smaller objects out past Neptune.

Answer 3

Yes, I am kind of bummed about losing Pluto as one of the planets, but it's a better option than the first one proposed where the number of planets was almost guaranteed to climb into the hundreds.

Answer 4

but for consolation, our moon (earth's moon) may become a planet.. ;-)
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/060817_moon_planet.html

No, not bummed.. science is not quite "exact", they are still trying to figure out a lot of things.

Answer 5

Disney will be bummed. What are they going to do with all of those costumes?