Because the stupid scientist people are all saying that its too small, just and insignifigant piece of rock. but thats what all the planets are. except earth, cuz we live on it. But pluto lives on!!!
2007-03-30 06:18:39 · 26 answers · asked by Hannahsaur 1 in Science & Mathematics ➔ Astronomy & Space
We need Pluto, the little guy. It is ingrained to us that we have 9 planets with pluto the smallest. What harm can it be to still consider pluto a planet - none. So, pluto should still be a planet.
2007-03-30 06:21:19 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
My Very Educated Mother Just Served Us Nine. . . Oh! How you feel so empty now acronym that I was taught in first grade! Pluto isn't a insignificant piece of rock, it was actually formed from the snow, dust, and space junk in that part of coldest, darkest part of space and that is how its moon Charon was created as well. To me it is a planet, sure there are other formations that can partake the "planet" status of Pluto but given the time we discovered Pluto and thus making it a planet we should keep to that as being the first ice planet we found and give it original planet status at least. It did revolve around the sun like the other 9 planets do. But no, everyone wants to be the first in doing something and if declaring a planet not being a planet they will get recognition from they will do so. Technically Mars used to look a lot like what Earth did with the green and blue exterior but has since dried up and now a barren wasteland of a planet with terrible ecosystem of 800 mile long landslides, volcanoes the size of Texas erupting, and countless other problems should we now say Mars isn't a planet since it is a "dead" planet just floating in the middle of our solar system? So because Mars holds no more significance I guess we should now take that out next if Pluto is being taken out.
2007-03-30 13:33:59 · answer #2 · answered by Fallen 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I still consider Pluto a planet. It may be considered a dwarf planet now - but it's still a planet to me.
I would rather have more planets than less! They could have found a better definition than what they came up with so that all the traditional planets would stay planets, and all the new found objects would have their own classification. Pluto has been a planet for so long - isn't it allowed to be an exception?
2007-03-30 13:47:11 · answer #3 · answered by Searching 4 Answers 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I believe Pluto should be a planet. Pluto is not considered a planet because it doesn't meet the requirements of the new definition of "planet", redefined by astronomers.
Right now means that a planet should be at least 1,000 miles across, made of certain material and must have its own orbit.
Pluto meets all the requirements except one, having its own orbit. Since Pluto's orbit crosses Neptune's, it's not considered a planet.
2007-03-30 17:37:29 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Many humans could be considered insignificant, but that doesn't mean they aren't still humans. Ok, I know, bad analogy. The universe would not be the same without Pluto. Just because it's not as cool as they want it to be, doesn't mean they need to write it off. Ok, if they take away Pluto's designation of planet, we need to start the Pluto is a Planet movement-an underground society of planet supporters looking to bring justice to the universe and all it's, well less than average planets. Who's With Me?!?!?!
2007-03-30 13:29:10 · answer #5 · answered by pinkluxe 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It makes no difference if you call Pluto a planet, or not. It's still the same frozen hunk of rock orbiting the sun. Not calling it a planet doesn't change that. Don't get so hung up on this, there are many more important things to worry about.
2007-03-30 13:32:04 · answer #6 · answered by ? 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's only nostalgia which beckons that Pluto remains a planet. If folks insist on calling Pluto a planet, then within 50 years we are going to have hundreds of "planets" in this solar system...because Pluto is hardly unique.
Is that what you really want?
If the world wants to make a nostalgic exception for Pluto, so be it, but if it goes purely be definition, it's simply ridiculous to keep calling Pluto a planet. For chrissakes...it's only half the size of our moon!!!
Get over it.
2007-03-30 14:23:03 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
if pluto is a planet then so is ceres and cheron and 2003 ub-313, bringing the total to 12, which some think is the rightful number. the orbits of neptune and uranus can only be explained if there was a another planet, bigger than pluto further out, the mythical planet x (also known as xena)...
2007-03-30 13:27:18 · answer #8 · answered by scauma 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think it should be.
It had been for over 70 years, and it is a fight shame that it is now a mere 'dwarf planet'...
I was very happy with the 9 planet solar system.
I know that more pluto like objects are being discovered now with our better telescopes, but pluto was found over 70 years ago, and has a good sentimental value to it.
2007-03-30 13:55:31 · answer #9 · answered by Wedge 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Think of Pluto's feelings, being demoted from a real planet. So sad. I'm all for Pluto being a planet, always and forever, totally. Go Pluto!
2007-03-30 13:27:23 · answer #10 · answered by Lady Z 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋