back to article Pluto still a planet, says Ronald McDonald

Those of you who prefer to protect your kids from US scientific propaganda would do well to steer clear of McDonalds, which has apparently decided it doesn't approve of the 2006 International Astronomical Union ruling which booted Pluto out of the league of planets. Try this Happy Meal box for fairly damning evidence of Ronald …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.
  1. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    This is what happens...

    ...when you get your degree in Astronomy from Hamburger University.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamburger_University

  2. david 63

    Semantic wranglings?

    It is officially a dwarf planet. Doesn't make it still a planet. My dwarf begonias are still begonias and my dwarf apple tree still produces apples. Therefore a dwarf planet is in the superset 'plenets', QED.

    But hey let's not miss good opportunity to get a dig in at the arch enemy.

    Is it beer o'clock yet?

  3. This post has been deleted by its author

  4. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    What were they thinking?

    Lying about science? I expect McDonald's will lose a large proportion of their literate customers (approx. 2 people).

  5. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Well....

    I don't like McDonalds but in this case I agree with them. It's too late to change now, Pluto is a planet, end of story.

  6. HFoster
    Pint

    @david 63

    I owe you a beer.

  7. Ken Hagan Gold badge
    FAIL

    What's a planet?

    Whenever science borrows a word with established usage, it doesn't overturn the established usage. Within our solar system, the established usage of planet is simply one of the nine. Attempts by nerds to eliminate one of them are as doomed as attempts by (similar?) nerds to change the emphasis when pronouncing Uranus.

    Even with my science hat on, I'd have to point out that the IAU's definition is itself not based on rigorously applied objective criteria, so perhaps there *is* no scientific term "planet" and the established usage is the only well-defined one. That would make Ronald McDonald rather smarter than all the nerds.

    Yes, I know, we had all this argument when the original decision was made, but the real story here is that the nerdy campaign to re-write the dictionary isn't working.

  8. John Ridley 1

    Can't have it both ways

    If Pluto is a planet, then there are probably something like 20 or more planets, since there are other bodies out there that are at least as large as Pluto is. Either there are 8, or a heck of a lot, pick one.

    If you want to claim it's a planet due to history, then there are still more than 9 planets, because the minor planets such as Ceres and Pallas were considered planets when first discovered.

  9. Graham Bartlett
    Headmaster

    Since we're on the pedantry subject

    ... wouldn't it be an "occurrence", not an "occurance"?

    Anyway, this is the same place which insists its food (and I use that word in the loosest possible way) is healthy. How much of their printed material do *you* believe?

  10. Annihilator
    Coat

    Dwarves

    To echo david 63, dwarves are still people! It's this kind of prejudice that is driving kids away from sciences. Won't somebody please think of the children??

  11. USAnglophile
    Troll

    The biggest mouth must be right

    [... discovered by Illinois native Clyde Tombaugh. Earlier this year, the state ordered that "March 13, 2009 be declared 'Pluto Day'... in honor of the date its discovery was announced in 1930"...]

    McDonald's HQ is also in Illinois, so this probably WAS propaganda as opposed to ignorance.

  12. david 63

    @HFoster

    Glad you understood it. I must learn to read the stuff that I write.

  13. Anonymous Coward
    Joke

    Pluto

    But he's still a dog right?

    Phew...

  14. Richard 102
    Grenade

    Illinois declared Pluto day?

    Well, good! I'm glad to see that Illinois has solved all their problems and has so little to worry about that they can declare a Pluto day. You know, now that there is no corruption, crime is eliminated, schools are fine, the kids aren't beating up someone who's different, roads are in good shape, the economy is humming, there is a surplus of money in the government coffers, the tolls have been eliminated, the Cubs are in the playoffs, ...

    And david 63, love the "arch enemy". Bravo!

  15. Nic Brough 1
    Pint

    Umm,

    they're wrong, either way you spin it.

    If Pluto is not a planet, they should have left it off. If it is, then they've forgotten the others

    My opinions on the exact rules of what is or is not a planet don't matter here, but if Pluto is a planet then McDonalds has failed to list the others. I can't find any reasonable rule (other than "because we said so") that would give us just 9 planets.

    Ah well, off to BOfH, then a pint I think...

  16. Niall Mac Caughey
    Coat

    Personally I blame Tom Paxton for this.

    As you can see (and hear):

    http://www.tompaxton.com/lyric_pluto.html

  17. Doug Southworth
    Thumb Down

    Wow

    "US scientific propaganda"

    As opposed to what, the perfectly unbiased science of the UK?

    Good to see nationalism is still alive and well in all parts of the globe.

  18. WinHatter
    Pint

    Ronald

    also defies food definition. That does not prevent many to adhere the McDoo church.

  19. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    But Pluto is a planet

    nuff said.

  20. Stef 2
    Coat

    Aw shucks

    We should consider ourselves lucky that they didn't go with "the eight planets and the Sun that orbit God's Earth".

  21. Dave Walker
    Boffin

    ONLY 9?

    They are forgetting quite a few:

    Ceres, Pallas, Juno, Vesta, Astraea, Hebe, Iris, Flora, Hygiea ,Parthenope, Victoria, Egeria, Irene, Eunomia, Bellona, Leukothea, and Fides used to be planets; now they are *just* asteroids.

    And on the outside, what about Eris, Makemake, Haumea, Sedna, Orcus, Quaoar, Varuna?

    Or is that too much for the little darlings to hold in their head? It might cause them to forget the names of some of their Poke'Mon.

    Have a Happy World Astronomy Week(end) and "Keep Looking Up!"

    DX

  22. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Forget Pluto no longer classed as a planet...

    ...why is McDonalds still classed as a restaurant?

    I'm sure the McDonalds brothers are spinning in their graves at the thought of the shite that is being served in their name. I've NEVER had a McDonalds burger that I haven't had to rebuild. The chips (yes, chips. They're made of potato, cut into strips and deep fried. Thats a chip!!) are always limp and barely warm. And their burgers have steadily got smaller over the years.... I'm sure a quarter pounder used to come (and fill) a box much bigger than it does now.

    I even got told to "f*ck off" once at a drive through because I wanted to wait (in my car) half and hour while they got the breakfast ready... That was probably because the spotty staff hadn't yet finished wiping their arses on the McMuffins!

    Oh BurgerKing, why have you STILL not kicked this shower of shite's arse yet???

  23. AlistairJ
    Paris Hilton

    That's the American educashun sys sis ^H^H

    No really, that is the American education system. The exam is a multiple choice:

    Which Ronald sells delicious sandwiches in his restaurant [sic]?

    1) McDonald (TM)

    2) Pluto

    3) Geoff Hurst in the 1966 World Cup final

    4) Paris Hilton

  24. Gordon Pryra
    Boffin

    @AC

    "chips (yes, chips. They're made of potato, cut into strips and deep fried. Thats a chip!!)"

    Actually, they are called "Frys" because they are not legally allowed to describe them as "chips".

    They are formed from reconstituted potato not stips of the ground egg. Break one open and you will see that they are more like a tube, with the potato mash stuff (tm) forming the walls.

    Thats all, carry on

  25. david 63

    @Anihilator

    I don't think we're allowed to call them dwarves any more. And I think Persons of Restricted Growth has gone out of fashion too.

  26. disgruntled yank Silver badge

    I states

    @Richard 102. Passing a resolution about Pluto: takes a few legislators half an hour. Cleaning up Illinois politics: well, the US Attorney can send a bunch of people to jail, but it's always to be done over again. And even the Pluto resolution beats Indiana's narrow escape from legislating a bogus value of pi.

    @AC: No, the burgers have not gotten smaller, they were never very large. The winner of the hamburger-eating contest at my high school (ca. 1973) said that it was basically a bread-eating contest. As for the fries, that depends on the staff. Not uncommonly one McD's will produce reliably edible fries while another five miles away will reliable produce limp and greasy ones.

  27. Mike Bird 1
    Flame

    Bogus McD's Quizcards

    The last time I had a McD's Quizcard was about 8 years ago, some music question which my music-mad boyfriend went "thats wrong".

    We took the card to one of the UK tabloid papers and sold them it, along with the story. Got about £1000 for it.

    The story being .. don't blag it on the internet, flog the story to the newspaper!

  28. seanj
    Joke

    Futurama

    "Attempts by nerds to eliminate one of them are as doomed as attempts by (similar?) nerds to change the emphasis when pronouncing Uranus."

    Obviously you've never seen Futurama then.

    FRY: This is great, as long as you don't make me smell Uranus. Heh heh.

    LEELA: I don't get it.

    PROFESSOR FARNSWORTH: I'm sorry, Fry, but astronomers renamed Uranus in 2620 to end that stupid joke once and for all.

    FRY: Oh. What's it called now?

    PROFESSOR FARNSWORTH: Urectum.

  29. John Savard

    Just a Mistake

    Except for avid amateur astronomers, and laypersons with an intense interest in science... and, of course, practising scientists, probably a lot of the general public has not even heard of the IAU ruling on Pluto's status.

    As a result, had they given the correct information on their Happy Meal, they would probably have been inundated with complaints about having gotten the number of planets wrong - as opposed to the much smaller number of correct omplaints they're now getting.

    So it could just be sheer ignorance... or malice aforethought with the intent of keeping overhead for customer relations lower.

  30. Seanie Ryan
    Alien

    loads

    I saw a TV documentary last night hosted by the guy who used to be McGyver.

    According to them there are litterally hundreds of planets in our solar systems, alot that support life too. They were able to get there by a ring like device with water in the middle.

    Fascinating really.

    So 8 or 9 is just irrelevant.

  31. Stephen Channell
    Pint

    Is a straight path through curved space-time the same as an orbit?

    When the whole of physics education is based on pretending the fabric of reality is simpler then it actually is.. who is truly qualified pick (black) holes in what goes onto a happy meal for small kids.

    Chill.. the designer might be ignorant of cosmology, but at least they didn’t say “god created 9 planets 3000ish years ago”

  32. Anonymous Coward
    Thumb Up

    @Seanie Ryan

    ...and they all look an awful lot like Vancouver. What are the odds?

  33. Chris65

    Illinois not alone

    New Mexico also declared Pluto to be a planet while overhead:

    http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewsr.nl.html?pid=23558

  34. Henry Wertz 1 Gold badge

    Politics

    I read about the controversy when the IAU "decided" Pluto wasn't a planet. It was actually quite political and dirty... they just could not come to an agreement. How they finally agreed.. well, they didn't. The "Pluto is not a planet" crowd actually waited until a bunch of the "Pluto is a planet" guys were out of the building and called a vote then. I don't know if they even had a quorum, maybe the rules for IAU don't require one.

    Personally, I don't see a good reason to not consider Pluto a planet, rather than making up a new category just for Pluto. It's not the same as the other planets for sure, but when it's been considered a planet this long, and didn't have any other clean category to put it in, I just don't see the harm.

  35. Anonymous Coward
    Happy

    There's a dwarf in space

    eating a beefburger? And this affects me how?

  36. Ed Blackshaw Silver badge
    Boffin

    If Pluto is a planet

    Does that mean that Charon is also a planet, as their centre of mass lies between the two of them?

  37. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Simple pleasures . . .

    A friend of mine, on the occasions when he visited McDonalds', would insist on asking for a sandwich. When the bemused PFY told hime they didn't serve sandwiches he would point at their own menu boards.

    A kinder, gentler age.

  38. R Callan
    Paris Hilton

    How could Pluto be overhead

    When he's the god of the underworld?

    Is Illinois part of the lunatic bible belt? Should they really be advocating non-christian myths?

    Paris because he knew what happened when you got on the wrong side of the gods.

  39. Laurel Kornfeld

    Pluto IS still a Planet

    Forget the word "plutoid," which almost nobody uses. Pluto IS still a planet, and kudos to McDonalds for recognizing that and not blindly following a controversial dictate by four percent of the IAU, most of whom are not planetary scientists, that was enacted in violation of their own bylaws. McDonalds is not alone--hundreds of planetary scientists led by Dr. Alan Stern, Principal Investigator of NASA's New Horizons mission to Pluto, signed a formal petition immediately rejecting the IAU decision. They prefer a broader planet definition in which any non-self-luminous spheroidal body orbiting a star is a planet. The spheroidal part is important because it means an object is large enough to be rounded by its own gravity, a state known as hydrostatic equilibrium. By that definition, our solar system has 13 planets: Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Ceres, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune, Pluto, Haumea, Makemake, and Eris. No one should be forced to accept the IAU's nonsensical definition, which states that dwarf planets are not planets at all and defines objects solely by where they are while ignoring what they are. Notably, according to the IAU definition, if Earth were in Pluto's orbit it would not be a planet either. A definition that takes the same object and makes it a planet in one location and not another is useless.

    Kudos to McDonalds for standing up to the IAU, or rather, to the tiny percentage who hijacked the 2006 vote to promote their own agenda. Their definition is already being ignored by many scientists and educators and will go the way of the dinosaurs once New Horizons flies by Pluto in 2015 and shows it to be a planet with geological processes, differentiation, and weather similar to those on Earth.

  40. Trevor Pott o_O Gold badge
    Boffin

    @Laurel Kornfeld

    Regardless of your acceptance of the IAU's definition of planet, there are not "nine planets" in this system. Either there are 8 (if you count the major planets) or there are a heckofalot, if you start counting every dwarf (and dwarf candidate) out there. Apart from the "traditional" 9, there are (as you stated) Ceres, Haumea, Makemake and Eris (the current "dwarf planets.") There are a lot more though. Vesta, Ixion, Huya, Orcus, Quaoar, Varuna, Sedna and a half yet more other "numbered but not named" bodies should also be (depending on your view of the IAU's ruling) either dwarf planets or simply "planets."

    Oh, and Charon should also be chucked in there as the center of mass between Charon and Pluto is between the two bodies, resulting in a "double planet."

    The point being made here is that we have moved well past the era where the Sol system can be considered to have "only 9 planets." Teaching that to the next generation is about the same as teaching that Russia (along with many surrounding countries) are still called the USSR.

  41. Bounty

    doh

    Laurel Kornfeld, I like your definition of hydrostatic equilibrium + orbits star. Mainly because it's scientific. Except, what if you had 2 objects the size of Mercury (same size) orbiting each other and the sun at the same time? Or Ganymede? Now what if you have Ganymede orbiting Mercury? Do we pick larger one by volume, mass or diameter to be "the planet" and the other(s) moons, or?

  42. Stevie

    Bah!

    I'm with McDonalds here: stuff those so-called "scientists" who can't think of any real science to do on their own and so waste everyone's time renaming stuff already done.

    They ought to be made to pay back all the grant money *and* and scholarships they got on account of it being obtained under false pretenses.

  43. John_the_Bastard
    FAIL

    If I recall correctly...

    Pluto failed the planet exam by not clearing it's orbit of debris. Since we have filled our own orbit with debris, we can no longer consider the Earth a planet. Comments?

  44. Mike Flugennock
    Boffin

    Sounds like it's an old leftover poster...

    ...and I can't believe people are still wasting time on that "Pluto Should Be A Planet" pissfight. Still, I can't help being nostalgic for the days when our solar system had nine planets and an asteroid belt between the rocky planets and the gas giants, and it was simple and elegant, and it worked, and it was good.

    But, seriously, folks... stop me if I'm wrong, but aren't there several Kuiper Belt Objects larger than Pluto, and technically large enough to be considered planets?

    Aren't there also a couple of inner asteroid belt objects that classify as Almost Planets?

    That's not to mention worlds such as the Jovian moon Ganymede (larger than Mercury?), and the Saturnian moon Titan (also larger than Mercury?), both of which would've been independent planets had they not been captured into orbit around their respective gas giants? Hell, man, Titan has an actual atmosphere, with a meteorological cycle, and everything.

    Oh, and let's not forget that there's a certain school of thought among astronomers that considers -- or at least used to consider -- Jupiter to be a "failed star" owing to its being a gas giant which is a strong radio source? I recall something to the effect that it's a failed star as it couldn't quite generate enough pressure at its core to ignite and become an actual star...meaning that we actually live in what's called a "proto-binary" star system.

    I could be wrong. Any astronomy geeks, feel free to chime in on this one.

  45. ABoyle
    Alien

    For the full story...

    Thanks for a good laugh on a Friday ... For all the dirt about Pluto's demotion (and my defense of the little guy), give a look to a book I've just written on the subject, "The Case for Pluto." As for Ronald McDonald's ruling, I guess I'll have to wedge that into the paperback edition somehow.

  46. brian murray 1

    When I use a word...

    Thanks to Laurel Kornfield for his contribution, but Stern's definition is as problematic as anyone else's if not more so. The Earth and many other planets are not perfectly spherical so what then counts as 'spherical'? The 'fact' is that there is no such as an objective 'fact' (erh - I think) - Wittgenstein says all language is just a game. The real issue, I think, is hinted at in Kornfield's post: NASA have launched a several billion dollar mission to a planet, and half way there they get told they are not going to a planet at all. No wonder they are cheeseburgered off. But this does seem like a USA-against-the-rest-of-the-world thing. Stern boasted that American Astronomical societies had the authority to 'overturn' the IAS decision. So much for democracy there.

  47. John Angelico
    Headmaster

    @Stephen Channell 13:44 GMT

    "Chill.. the designer might be ignorant of cosmology, but at least they didn’t say “god created 9 planets 3000ish years ago”"

    Crikey, there are a lot of people from the Bronze Age who just rolled over in their graves at that one, Stephen!

    If you want to have a go at the creationists, how about getting your facts straight?

    Alternatively, if you insist on waving your membership card to the Raving Looney Party, go right ahead.

  48. Mussie (Ed)

    As i said to my boy

    I dont give a dam what they say its still the 9th planet in my eyes

    WE LOVE YOU PLUTO

  49. John Savard

    Nine Worlds I Know

    In the Elder Edda, there is a passage about there being "nine worlds", one where we live, one for the Vanir, one for the Aesir, one for the Frost Giants, and so on. So, back when the Pluto debate was raging, I humorously suggested that depriving Pluto of its planetary status... might lead to Midgard being invaded by Frost Giants looking for a new home!

  50. Ken Hagan Gold badge
    Grenade

    @Laurel Kornfeld

    "[...] the IAU's nonsensical definition, which [...] defines objects solely by where they are while ignoring what they are."

    It's actually even dafter than that, since Neptune hasn't been demoted, but also because no mention is given of a timescale. Just *when* does the IAU expect Pluto to collide with Neptune? Answer: they haven't a clue -- the state of the art in solar system modeling just isn't up to it. All we really know is that it hasn't happened in the last few billion years and isn't forecast to happen ever. It is therefore absurd to argue that Pluto hasn't cleared its orbit.

    And to all those still puzzled b y why this debate rumbles on I would simply point out that that's the nature of scientists. They object to inconsistent definitions and a lot of them are rather annoyed that the IAU is putting quite so much of its (and in the public eye, their) reputation behind something that is demonstrably bollocks.

    As I said at the beginning, we have no rigorously applied definition of "planet" as a technical term. That being the case, standard linguistic practice is to go with the meaning defined by common usage amongst the general population. So there are nine of them.

  51. Martin Nicholls
    Stop

    The issue is

    Not that pluto isn't a planet per se - more that if you look around at the other objects floating around, there are many more 'planet like' objects than pluto, i.e. bigger with saner orbits.

    So the issue is where you draw the line. Why don't we teach children the names of the thousands of such objects you could call a planet?

    The idea is to know why planets aren't always planets and the differences between them rather than just teaching people mnemonics and assuming that makes you intelligent somehow.

    I like Dr. Neil deGrasse Tyson's [the person usually credited with starting this whole discussion] explanation of this though - that it's both the only one discoverd by an American and that there's somewhat of a Disney conspiricy.

  52. Anonymous Coward
    Coat

    Dead Scream!

    After all, you don't want to get the Guardian of the Gates of Time mad, do you?

  53. Lars 3
    FAIL

    RE: Well....

    "I don't like McDonalds but in this case I agree with them. It's too late to change now, Pluto is a planet, end of story."

    Does that mean that the earth is still flat and at the centre of the universe?

  54. Field Marshal Von Krakenfart
    Coat

    Uranus gets a bum deal

    @Gordon Pryra

    Actually, they are called "Frys"

    Or even "Fries" made from potatoe mash stuff

    Are ewe a nother produckt of 'merhin educhasation (Sorry, could'nt resit that)

    Ah poor Uranus, always the butt of peoples jokes, and not one post (so far) about the rings around Uranus, a right pain in the arse that.

    Spitting Images did a better joke abou Uranus being renamed Bumhole, pronounced B-yume-hol-EE.

    Mines the one with the big soft ring shaped cushion in the pocket

  55. Laurel Kornfeld

    Some Responses

    @ brian murray 1: First, to get definitions straight, I am a she, not a he. Spherical doesn't mean an object is perfectly round; rather, it means the object has been shaped by its own gravity rather than by chemical bonds. Objects must achieve a certain size to attain this status, known as hydrostatic equilibrium. They can be oblate spheroids or have a squashed round shape; the important point is that it is their gravity that shapes them.

    Stern's opposition to the IAU decision is not about New Horizons. That probe was already launched before the IAU made its horrendous decision. The Dawn probe, of similar expense to New Horizons, was launched to Vesta and Ceres, when both were considered merely asteroids. We have also launched missions to comets. This argument is a red herring. Stern's argument is based on his position as a planetary scientist, favoring a definition that classifies an object by what it is rather than only by where it is.

    @ Martin Nicholls: Support for Pluto's planet status has nothing to do with Disney. Most who are concerned about this already have some interest in the solar system and astronomy. Tyson says he cannot account for public affinity for Pluto; therefore, it must be due to the dog. There is no logic in this statement. Just because he can't explain the phenomenon doesn't mean he can just pick any answer and claim it is the right one.

    @doh: If two objects of the same size orbit one another and orbit the Sun, what we have is a binary planet system. Both should be considered planets. Even though Charon is about half the size of Pluto, the center of mass around which the two bodies rotate is outside of Pluto and in between the two, making a good case for classifying Charon as a planet as well.

    @Mike Flugennot: There is only one known Kuiper Belt Object larger than Pluto, and that is Eris, which should also be considered a planet. In the asteroid belt between Mars and Jupiter, Ceres should be considered a planet, as it is in a state of hydrostatic equilibrium. Vesta is questionable, as it appears to have been spherical and then had its south pole lobbed off by an impact from an asteroid. The Dawn mission will likely tell us more about Vesta's composition and help determine in which category it belongs. As for Jupiter, it never fused hydrogen or deuterium (the latter is an isotope of hydrogen fused by brown dwarfs, true failed stars), so it remains in the planet rather than star category.

  56. Anonymous Coward
    Troll

    @Laurel Kornfeld

    Hello again Laurel. I have just today noticed your essay about my posts regarding Pluto last year (http://laurele.livejournal.com/5823.html). I have to say I'm flattered that you devoted the time to respond to my comment so extensively.

    I do however feel you may have taken my comments a little seriously. I understand that some of the readers of El Reg across the pond have trouble with it's dry, tongue in cheek, sometimes sarcastic reporting style. This theme tends to continue with the comments, and mine were no exception. As an aside, I think El Reg picking up the McDonald's story is probably quite tongue in cheek too. I'm sure the editors realise it was probably just a mistake on their part, but wanted a mildly amusing article from it.

    Of course I didn't leave teaching because of a simple issue like that. The reasons were numerous and complex. The rigour and prescriptive nature of the teaching in some areas was just one factor. In that respect I agree with you- the curriculum shouldn't be so inflexible as to deduct marks from pupils that are understandably confused by the removal of Pluto's planet status.

    I am a physicist by training, and my opinion of the matter of Pluto's classification is strongly in the "what difference does it make" camp; I don't really care either way. Your opinion appears in my view somewhat extreme. You are of course entitled to your opinion, but I am completely baffled as to why you care at all. It really makes no difference to anything. I'm quite familiar with the Orwellian power of language to influence thought, but I fail to see the relevance in this case. What has anyone lost if Pluto is regarded as a big rock like many others (including its closest "moon", which is more than half its size)? You may as well argue about whether my hair is blonde or light brown- it doesn't change anything. Except maybe for Hitler.

    So, contrary to your suggestion, I do respect your "values", but I don't understand what they have to do with Pluto. If I was perhaps questioning your view on a moral, religious, or ethical point, that would be a question about values. The Pluto discussion is one of simple semantics- unless Pluto is some kind of religion for you? You certainly seem quite evangelical about it. You obviously have a lot of energy for this sort of thing, and I wonder what could be achieved if you directed it to a cause that actually helped humanity in some way.

  57. John H Woods

    B*gger

    ... wish i'd seen this story earlier. Hasn't anybody noticed that the little animated characters from Planet Cook are the FOUR tastes, sweet, salt, sour and bitter.

    What about Umami? This is just racism against the eastern-looking guy, I reckon.

  58. Laurel Kornfeld

    Semantics Do Matter

    @Christopher Martin I agree that sometimes it's hard to tell if an article is intended to be sarcastic or tongue in cheek. When an article is clearly intended to be humorous, I try to respond in an equally humorous way.

    That said, as a writer, I do believe semantics matter. What we choose to call things shapes public perception, and in many cases, perception "becomes" reality. For example, the mainstream media and Hollywood choose to call people of normal weight, especially women, "fat," if they do not have what has been artificially designated as a "beautiful body," specifically one that is super-thin. How many women and girls torture themselves to get that super-thin look when in reality their bodies are healthy and normal as they are? How many talented actresses are denied roles just because they aren't a size 4?

    While curricula should not be so inflexible as to deduct points from students who include Pluto with the planets, the fact remains that in real life, as a result of the very problematic IAU decision, they are. The lesson is that an "authority" can change what is and that the role of students, teachers, and the public is to blindly accept it, even if it is highly flawed and makes little sense.

    You should be directing your comments to the IAU, the Register, and others that adamantly support the IAU decision, such as the German astronomer who was quoted. The Register and the astronomer expressed outrage that kids are being taught "American propangada" and "conned" into believing Pluto is still a planet. Conned??? These critics completely ignore that this is still an ongoing debate. And the IAU itself cannot agree on what its role even is. IAU spokespeople have been heard to say that IAU definitions are only for internal use within the IAU. If that is so, why do IAU officials and those who support them then become outraged when those outside the IAU choose not to accept their definitions? Which one is it? If IAU definitions are only for IAU internal use, why did World Book Encyclopedia hold off on printing its 2007 edition until the IAU made its decision and then subsequently portray the IAU view as the only reality?

    Obviously, I believe what we call Pluto does make a difference. Yes, some of it is a question of values--in other words, is it sufficient to teach a simple version of the solar system with eight planets and blur the distinction between big rocks and objects in hydrostatic equilibrium that behave like planets do? To me, doing this is a disservice to all students. Pluto is not a big rock like many others. It is a small planet, and as such, it has important lessons to teach us about this new third class of planets, the dwarf planets.

    You of course have the right to disagree with me and to direct your energies toward any cause you choose. I believe I am making a difference in getting people to seriously think about this and that some people are bothered because my efforts and those of other like-minded people have had an impact in keeping the debate going and maintaining a continued resistance to the IAU decision (why not ask the IAU why they bothered to take so much time and effort to address this issue in 2006?). If you don't care about this issue, why does my refusal to "let go" of it (God, I hate that term with a passion) bother you?

This topic is closed for new posts.

Other stories you might like