The return of Pluto!? There appears to be terrestrial, gaseous and ice planets. If Pluto has valleys, plains, canyons, hills, volcanoes and mountains, regardless of gravity and atmosphere, can Pluto be a planet!?
2006-12-17 13:42:47 · 15 answers · asked by Sir Grandmaster Adler von Chase 7 in Science & Mathematics ➔ Astronomy & Space
I disagree. It does not fit the criteria. If Pluto were named as a planet, hundreds of other objects in our solar system would have to be called planets as well.
2006-12-17 13:44:54 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
I also agree with many people above. I do have a soft spot for Pluto. But there are so many flaws with it. For example, when I was taught the order of the planets, Pluto was not the last one (Neptune and Pluto switch places for about a decade or two).
Science adapts as more information is received. That is just a part of science. Imagine if we still believed that the Earth was the center of the universe because we had a softspot for that theory.
2006-12-17 14:53:18 · answer #2 · answered by cevfuture 1 · 3⤊ 0⤋
ME!!! Pluto has always been a planet in my learning experience! I think people are just trying to get that idea across for attention. WHATEVER! If Pluto isn't a planet, why did we accept this large, round asteroid into our solar system in the first place?
2006-12-17 15:26:12 · answer #3 · answered by mtngrl 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
If Pluto has valleys, plains, canyons, hills, volcanoes and mountains, regardless of gravity and atmosphere, can Pluto be a planet!?
If pluto can't be.. then how can earth..?? we have all of those things as well...
2006-12-17 13:46:14 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
No. Give it up already. Pluto is chunck of ice and rock with thousands of similar chuncks of ice and rock out there nearby it. If Pluto is a planet, so are all of them - and then you have more than a hundred planets to memorize instead of eight. I don't understand the problem people seem to be having with this. It's a simple matter of definition.
2006-12-17 14:24:14 · answer #5 · answered by eri 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋
I think that if Uranus can be a planet, Pluto should be able to be one too. It's only fair.
2006-12-17 13:44:56 · answer #6 · answered by Get Real 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
well we've called pluto a planet for many years it's no good changing it all of a sudden.
it would just ruin what everybody was taught in the past.
2006-12-17 13:46:06 · answer #7 · answered by Adrian R 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I would keep it a a planet, only because I have a soft spot for it. heh.
it's just weird not having it as a planet anymore because I've grown up learning that it's a planet.
2006-12-17 13:46:31 · answer #8 · answered by ladyjeansntee 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I AGREE with ladyjeans. i strongly believe in tradition and think pluto should remain a planet. perhaps, from now on, criteria for planethood should more selective
2006-12-17 14:08:01 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
what does it really matter about? its an object that had been there long before we human exist. we are not superior enough to de-tag pluto as planet or what. as long as we know its the furthest object in our solar system. so we leave that way. correct.
2006-12-17 16:04:31 · answer #10 · answered by yeshuva_tg1 1 · 1⤊ 1⤋