What I'm referring to is the prevalence of junk science, which IMHO has made large numbers of lay people into science skeptics. The Malthus/Ehrlich population bomb hoax, the vastly exaggerated claims we were all about to die from a nuclear winter and if that didn't happen radiation from nuclear power plants would get us, the DDT/pesticide lie, IUD's, silicone breast implants, AIDS was going to affect all American heterosexuals, Algore's global warming nonsense . . . . And that's just the tip of the iceberg.
At one time scientific results were very intuitive. That changed around the time quantum theory was developed. (Around the same time, curiously, it became impossible for lay people to tell good art from bad art.) It seems to me the scientific community needs to do a much better job of calling out the hucksters who distort science for profit or political gain and restore some credibility that many don't realize has been lost.
My main point with Pluto is that nearly everyone alive has grown up with the idea that Pluto is a planet. NASA is sending a ship there to "complete" its initial exploration of the planets. Most people aren't exposed to a lot of science in school, but one thing everyone learns in elementary school is the catechism of the Planets. Couldn't we leave Pluto on the list until lay people are exposed to the idea and get comfortable with the fact we only relatively recently learned that Pluto is one of many, many Kuiper objects that really aren't like the original eight planets?
I saw in the paper this morning there is already reaction against the decision as just another example of nutty junk science. I really didn't expect it to happen this quickly, though.
It is universally agreed that had they known how small Pluto was when it was first discovered, it never would have been designated a planet in the first place. After all, Ceres was at one time considered a planet.