Skip to comments.
Possible new planet is larger than Pluto-research (Reuters demonstrates their ignorance yet again)
Reuters ^
| 2/1/06
| Patricia Reaney
Posted on 02/01/2006 2:50:01 PM PST by Freedumb
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-23 next last
Just another example demonstrating how little science/technical knowledge the typical MSM reporter/editor has. Hey geniuses at Reuters, Kepler figured out 400 years ago that the planets moved in an elliptical orbit, not a circular orbit. The Earth DOES NOT orbit consistently at 93 million miles, it varies from around 91 to 94.5 million miles.
1
posted on
02/01/2006 2:50:03 PM PST
by
Freedumb
To: Freedumb
"We actually measured the size of UB313 which was not known prior to these observations,"So is it bigger than UB40?
2
posted on
02/01/2006 2:52:16 PM PST
by
steveo
(No Anchovies? You've got the wrong man, I spell my name steveo...)
To: steveo
3
posted on
02/01/2006 2:54:19 PM PST
by
keithtoo
(Global Warming causes everything, and everything causes Global Warming.)
To: Freedumb
Yet if you were to visually inspect the Earths orbit from a long distance away, you'd be hard pressed to say it was not circular.
Same thing with the oblateness of the Earth. The Earth is actually more spherical than most pool balls you will ever see.
4
posted on
02/01/2006 2:57:19 PM PST
by
djf
To: keithtoo
Bigger than Ted Kennedy??
To: Freedumb
Yep, they are knuckleheads. But what do you expect when most people fear or loathe science when they are taught it in school? The "what makes a planet" debate is pretty interesting though. Personally, if a body has a sustainable atmosphere (however tenuous) that is independent of orbital position (ruling out comets), and does not revolve around another body (ruling out moons like Titan), then it probably deserves planethood.
6
posted on
02/01/2006 3:00:16 PM PST
by
opticks
To: steveo
7
posted on
02/01/2006 3:01:59 PM PST
by
Vaquero
(time again for the Crusades.)
To: Freedumb
Pluto must have slowed down...it used to take 248 years for a single trip around the sun.
The last planet larger than Pluto discovered was also discovered in Germany, by Galle in 1846, using calculations sent him by a Frenchman, LeVerrier.
To: KevinDavis
9
posted on
02/01/2006 3:03:48 PM PST
by
Vaquero
(time again for the Crusades.)
To: steveo
10
posted on
02/01/2006 3:05:57 PM PST
by
1rudeboy
To: Freedumb
Well then I'm a dope too. If somebody asks me how far Earth is from the sun, I say 93 million miles; I don't additionally give a mini-lecture about focal points.
11
posted on
02/01/2006 3:06:54 PM PST
by
jiggyboy
(Ten percent of poll respondents are either lying or insane)
To: steveo
No, but it's bigger than Uranus.
12
posted on
02/01/2006 3:07:37 PM PST
by
dfwgator
To: keithtoo
But not bigger than Ur-anus!
HAHAHAHA
Me so funnny.
13
posted on
02/01/2006 3:10:52 PM PST
by
MeanWestTexan
(Many at FR would respond to Christ "Darn right, I'll cast the first stone!")
To: JoeSixPack1
Bigger, but not a gaseous, or Scotch-filled.
14
posted on
02/01/2006 3:14:22 PM PST
by
keithtoo
(Global Warming causes everything, and everything causes Global Warming.)
To: djf
The Earth is actually more spherical than most pool balls you will ever see.No wonder I can't shoot straight. All thos tiny little mountains keep the ball falling off its track.
15
posted on
02/01/2006 3:24:09 PM PST
by
raybbr
(ANWR is a barren, frozen wasteland - like the mind of a democrat!)
To: raybbr
Does this planet contradict Bode's law?
To: scrabblehack
Bode's Law isn't a law, it's a mnemonic (at best). (':
17
posted on
02/01/2006 9:41:19 PM PST
by
SunkenCiv
(In the long run, there is only the short run.)
To: Freedumb
Not to nitpick, but this has already appeared on FreeRepublic, and it's in the active list. :'(
18
posted on
02/01/2006 9:42:09 PM PST
by
SunkenCiv
(In the long run, there is only the short run.)
19
posted on
02/01/2006 9:57:00 PM PST
by
SunkenCiv
(In the long run, there is only the short run.)
To: SunkenCiv
I realized that the AP-Yahoo story was already posted, but it did not contain the error that the Reuters story did about the Earth being a constant distance (hence a circular orbit) from the Sun.
The reason for my post was not the story itself, but to point out that the Reuters reporter/editor seemed unaware of a fact that has been known for about 400 years.
While I would not criticize the average person if they made this mistake in a conversation, I would expect some degree of fact-checking by one of the largest news organizations in the world.
20
posted on
02/02/2006 9:24:26 AM PST
by
Freedumb
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-23 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson