[meteorite-list] Astronomers to Decide What Makes a Planet

[Chris Peterson]

Not at all. There is a difference between the public misusing something that 
already has a formal definition (meteor), and the scientific establishment 
adopting a new definition for a word that has been used in a certain way for 
centuries (planet)- a definition at odds with how the word is now used.

I say come up with a new word. Then the planets are, and always will be, 
what they are now- the nine bodies from Mercury to Pluto. And scientists 
won't have to spend the next 100 years qualifying what they mean by planet 
every time they talk with the lay public.

Chris

*****************************************
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Darren Garrison" <cynapse at charter.net>
To: "Dawn & Gerald Flaherty" <grf2 at verizon.net>
Cc: "Meteorite Mailing List" <meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2005 7:05 PM
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Astronomers to Decide What Makes a Planet


On Tue, 02 Aug 2005 20:47:39 -0400, "Dawn & Gerald Flaherty" 
<grf2 at verizon.net> wrote:

Yeah, by the same "give up on defining a planet because a planet is what the 
general public says it
is" logic, we might as well start calling meteorites meteors, because the 
general public tends to
call meteorites meteors.  Or we should accept that apes are monkeys, because 
the general public
calls them monkeys.  Or that pterasaurs are flying dinosaurs, because the 
general public calls them
flying dinosaurs.

I say come up with a reasonable definition, and if that disagrees with what 
the "general public"
thinks, then tell the general public to go sit on a bunsen burner.