Quote:
Originally Posted by baric
To imply that I somehow couldn't defend my statement because I didn't reply for the umpteenth time to a post at the end of yet another long discussion thread is unwarranted, imo.
|
IMO, it is warranted.
Quote:
|
Stern's words in 2000 speak for themselves.
|
They seem to speak for themselves, but are you guys reading them?
Quote:
Originally Posted by parallaxicality
ex-squeeze me?
|
From
that paper that you guys are linking to:
Quote:
A planetary body is defined as any body in space that satisfies the following testable upper and lower bound criteria on its mass. If isolated from external perturbations, the body must:
1) Be low enough in mass that at no time (past or present) can it generate energy in its interior due to any self-sustaining nuclear fusion chain reaction. And also,
2) Be large enough that its shape becomes determined primarily by gravity rather than mechanical strength or other factors...
|
Table 2. of the paper, near the last page, is "A Roster of Known Planets in Our Solar System By Type" and Pluto is included in the table, as is Jupiter and "Numerous KBOs".
I don't think you can use that paper to accuse Stern of hypocrisy. In fact, if that's all you got, I think you owe him an apology.