Science rarely elevates a theory to a "law" and instead speaks of evidence accruing for or against theories. Ditto for taxonomy whether classifying a planet or a fossil.
And some theories which remain good in one context fail in another - e.g. Newtonian physics v. Relativity v. Quantum Mechanics.
It was supposedly an example of a time science was wrong. I think it's fair to label an assertion that something was wrong an "anti-something" assertion. But no big deal.
Science rarely elevates a theory to a "law" and instead speaks of evidence accruing for or against theories. Ditto for taxonomy whether classifying a planet or a fossil.
The point is that the evidence didn't change, and the question of whether Pluto is a planet or not wasn't a theory. We didn't learn anything new about Pluto that led us to reclassify it--it was purely definitional and entirely up to science how to define "planet." Right or wrong doesn't enter into it.