Pluto is in possible danger, of being demoted from planetary status, to a mere planetoid.
The status accepted as fact for quite some time, may not in fact be factual.
It seems there are eligibility requirements for planets, and Pluto is perhaps something less than required.
So, if one were to say that Pluto is a planet, would that be a fact, or a fallacy? Does the length of time, that Pluto's status as a planet has not been questioned, alter the fact, one way or the other?
To paraphrase the "logic" of certain replies on this thread, "why, the claim that Pluto is a planetoid is of such recent vintage! Where were these claims, back when Pluto was first discovered?"
Pluto was demoted in January. I felt bad for Mickey Mouse and thought it was Goofy thing to do!
I had thought the eligibility requirement was the body must spin and have a moon to qualify.
But, I have been out of High School for 30 years.
I think it would be more accurate to say simply that Pluto exists as the judging panel cannot deny it’s existence only its status of categorization.
Still it seems unfair. Pluto seemed nice enough. Never bothered me.
lol