This is why changing Pluto's status into a Dwarf Planet was illegitimate. Most planetary scientists weren't in the room when the vote was made. Creating a sub category (Dwarf Planet) because some don't like the idea of potentially adding hundreds of planets to our solar system is NOT a scientific reason for change. Lastly, the third rule for determining planetary status is totally arbitrary.
I don't count the "gas giants" as planets, because I think an orbiting body needs to be solid to qualify as a planet.
So in my planetary classification system, Pluto is reinstated, but Jupiter, Saturn, Neptune, and Uranus are booted out.
Ive heard this argument before and I think there's more validity to classifying a planet as a rocky (or icy) object than the argument for classifying Dwarf Planets.
I don't count the "gas giants" as planets, because I think an orbiting body needs to be solid to qualify as a planet.
So in my planetary classification system, Pluto is reinstated, but Jupiter, Saturn, Neptune, and Uranus are booted out.
Ive heard this argument before and I think there's more validity to classifying a planet as a rocky (or icy) object than the argument for classifying Dwarf Planets.
Did you ever see Kirk and Spock beaming down to the gaseous planet on Star Track?
