14 replies to this topic

[copywriter]

We all learned in school that there were 4 oceans: Atlantic, Pacific, Indian and Arctic. But, just this year, "they" added a 5th ocean.

http://en.wikipedia..../Southern_Ocean

Wonder just exactly how you add an ocean? Who approves such things?

[qwerty]

I suppose if you can remove a planet, you can also get away with adding an ocean.

[copywriter]

Remove a planet?! Who the heck did that? Which one got the ax?

[copywriter]

I just found it.

Pluto is no longer classified as a planet

"They" booted out the runt.

[Jill]

Never heard of this southern ocean, but Karon, I can't believe you didn't hear about Pluto's demise! (Think we talked about it here awhile back.)

[Randy]

My opinion on Pluto holds firm. The science geeks can try to kick it out if they want, but Pluto will always be a planet to me.

I hope they don't expect me to jet down to vacation in the Southern Ocean. I don't like the cold here, so I'm sure I wouldn't like the cold there!

[zephyr]

It seems it is now termed a "plutoid", but there is a move afoot to re-enable its planetary status.
Some want to call it a "dwarf planet".
There may even be a breakup of the International Astronomical Union over the matter.

Let us hereby resolve that High Rankings Forum will never descend into such chaos & controversy
over a definition of what is an SEO..........

[copywriter]

Let us hereby resolve that High Rankings Forum will never descend into such chaos & controversy
over a definition of what is an SEO..........

Too late! There has already been chaos and controversy over that.


I don't think Pluto should be downgraded just because of its size. Poor little guy. How embarrassing!

[torka]

Well, if you're going to reinstate Pluto as a "full planet", you have to add in the other dwarf planets: Eris, Ceres, Haumea and MakeMake, and probably a handful of other as-yet-undiscovered Kuiper Belt objects. No fair listing Pluto as a planet and not including them -- especially Eris, as it's bigger than Pluto.

There's a lot of stuff going on out there in the far reaches of the solar system that astronomers never considered when they jumped to designate Pluto as a planet back in 1930. As it turns out, seems to me the Kuiper Belt objects have a lot more in common with comets than they do with the other planets, with their eccentric, tilted orbits and icy composition. Since then astronomers have discovered any number of objects that are similar enough to Pluto they should potentially all be considered for planet-hood if Pluto is also considered a planet.

I understand the sentimentality, but I'm squarely in the "Pluto should never have been classified as a planet in the first place" camp.

--Torka

[Deverill]

It is said that the only constant is that there will be change.

I have an atlas at home from when I was a kid that has Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia, the Soviet Union and two Germanys. I can't even keep up with all the changes anymore. And the science-vs-religion arguments always say that science is facts yet science changes their mind every other day. Poor Pluto. What's next? Sammy Davis Jr. wasn't a real person because he was small?

I'm just glad I'm not trying to get a GED -- I'd never pass some of these kinds of questions!

[Randy]

Sammy Davis Jr. wasn't a real person because he was small?

Excellent point Jim!

Take that Torka.

[nethy]

What do you mean you never heard of the Southern Ocean?!! I can smell it from here. It's always been here.

Americans.. Spelling & geography.

[Nueromancer]

It is said that the only constant is that there will be change.

I have an atlas at home from when I was a kid that has Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia, the Soviet Union and two Germanys. I can't even keep up with all the changes anymore. And the science-vs-religion arguments always say that science is facts yet science changes their mind every other day. Poor Pluto. What's next? Sammy Davis Jr. wasn't a real person because he was small?

I'm just glad I'm not trying to get a GED -- I'd never pass some of these kinds of questions!

I iwsh i had kept The email but when i used to do international stuff for BT I got a sad email from my oposite number in Yougoslavia anoucing the break up of his country and from such and such a date the various country codes where changing and how mail should be routed.

[nethy]

And the science-vs-religion arguments always say that science is facts yet science changes their mind every other day. Poor Pluto

I know it's not the point, but I feel I should bite. 'Science' (IE, the scientific process from the vs religion debate), is defined as something fluid. Theories replace facts. Arguments replace proofs. There is a bunch of confusion that comes from taking imprecise terms used colloquially & then trying to get exact results. 'Science' (in this context) can be though of as a rule: anything can be challenged with logic, evidence & argument. Those things that that are put forward to be challenged are called theories - The theory of relativity, or string theory.

Some (like relativity) are almost like facts & we sometimes colloquially call them facts. Scientists also treat them like facts & build other theories on them or on other theories based on them. They have strong evidence supporting them like real world predictions & measurements. But they are still theories forever and can always be challenged.

Others (like string theory) are closer to what we colloquially call theories: Something that we are not really sure about but we're putting it out there to see if it fits. Others may develop it or throw some more building blocs on top of it, but they keep it in mind that it may not be true and is probably at least a bit off.
What makes science science, is that it keeps changing its mind.

[copywriter]

you have to add in the other dwarf planets

Excuse me, but it's my sentimentality... I don't have to do anything

How in the world did we get to the "science vs. religion" thing?

There is a bunch of confusion that comes from taking imprecise terms used colloquially & then trying to get exact results.

Exactly! Like the theory of evolution which Darwin himself said would never be able to be proven. It's now taught in schools as fact when it isn't.