Should Pluto have been declassified as a planet?

Answer 1

i think there were two choices - classify eris, sedna and other assorted KBOs and SDOs as planets, or declassify pluto, since it's clearly got more in common with those other small ice balls than it does with the gas giants or the inner rocky planets. still, the definition of planethood we have now is not that much better than what we started with.

Answer 2

If Mickey's dog had been named something else, nobody would have cared about Pluto.

Science needed a firm definition of what a planet was, so after a whole lot of debate, they finally came up with one and old Pluto didn't make the cut. It was a mistake that Pluto was ever given planet status in the first place. When it was first discovered scientists thought it was a whole lot bigger.

So what does that really mean? Absolutely nothing. Pluto hasn't vanished, it hasn't changed. It's just got a different classification. That's all. Clinging to it over some silly sentimentality or stubbornness is just that, silly. Pluto's value as a solar system object has not been reduced.

Answer 3

No, it is just a dwarf planet, a special kind of object. Also, there are asteroids, which have moons as well, like Ida and Dactylus. This alone is no reason for planet status. Pluto is just one small object in a bigger group of objects, so it is just like Ceres, either just an asteroid (the informal definition before 2006) or a Dwarf planet (according to the 2006 formal definition). Before 2006, there was never any definition what a planet actually is. People just said: You are a planet and you are not. Because we say so. Ceres was for a while a planet, before it got downgraded to asteroid. Pluto was always a planet, despite being the most unplanetlike - because it was the only "planet" ever discovered in the USA.

Answer 4

Wow, talk about crying over spilt milk!
You had your chance to file all of your opinions before the International Astronomical Union met in General Assembly 2006 August 18.
Keep in mind that until that time there was no firm definition of "planet".
When Pluto was discovered in 1930, it's size was estimated to be 12% larger than Earth. It's true size is smaller than Luna. It's inclined 17 degrees to the orbital plane of our solar system and it has a very elliptical orbit.
Please wait until the IAU reconvenes to forward your disagreements.


ohh, ummm, yes.

Answer 5

no instead they should have turned the other 53 or 54(i forget) other formations that they found just like pluto into planets and thought of names for all of them, it just came down to a matter of conveniance, thats why it was declassified as a planet

Answer 6

Planet is a scientific classification for an object in space. I can’t see why people are so upset about Pluto being re-classified.

Also, it is not open to opinion. Arguing about it is like being upset about humans been included in the primate family – it is just a classification folks. Get used to it. It happens all the time in science.

Answer 7

According to science, it is just too small. But really, Pluto is still Pluto, the same Pluto from 10,000 years ago... it really all depends on your definition of "planet."

Answer 8

No. I am 58 years old, and all my life I was taught that Pluto is a planet!!! I will always think of Pluto as a planet, and just because someone recently said it is not, well, who the heck are they???
May God bless you.

Answer 9

Does it really matter, in the scheme of things? What we label an object is less important than studying it, the facts about it.
We will find that we have to redefine planets once we start learning more about worlds in other star systems. Our solar system is not unique, and nature seems to love things that don't fit into neat boxes.

Answer 10

Officially, it was simply a lot less hassle to demote Pluto. Unofficially...Pluto will always be a planet.