Pluto is fit to be tied.
A tomboy who calls herself C.W., just whisked by on her bike, then whisked around Pluto in full orbit, calling out in exaggerated empathy: “Oh you poor thing Pluto, you got down-sized like the best of us, eh? You got midgetized, eh?
“First of all,” Pluto measuredly snapped back between his teeth, er, between his moons, “it’s dwarf, not midget, dwarf planet, that’s my new category –”.
“Oh well then –,” said C.W., making a brave effort at smothering her giggles.
Pluto is furious.
Particularly at Canada. The AMEC company based out of a Port Coquitlam warehouse, was instrumental in building the telescope that upped the ante on who’s in and who’s out of the Elite Eight Planet Club.
Pluto used to be number 9, since its discovery by American amateur astronomer, then 24-year old Clyde William Tombaugh in 1930.
Advanced AMEC technology led to the discovery a year and a half ago of 2003 UB313, based on images taken in October 2003. Decidedly wider than Pluto, 2003 UB313 would have to be number 10 of the solar system or Pluto would have to go.
Even C.W. commiserated that she really didn’t think that Pluto would just be kicked to the curb, in just one vote, just like that. But that’s exactly what the International Astronomical Union (IAU) just did.
“Unions.” Pluto tried to control his disgust. “Groupthink mentality … what else do you expect,” he muttered.
How could science be so arbitrary, C.W. wondered? Just one vote and her textbook became useless.
In the interim, the trouble-making 2003 UB313 had been christened Xena, wouldn’t you know, though there has been no official baptism in that respect. Just a nickname. Still, the symbolism is not lost on anyone.
“Size matters, I guess,” Pluto lamented. C.W. agreed. The surviving widow of the late Tombaugh along with their son, a retired banker, though expressing disappointment at Pluto’s demotion, at first said Tombaugh would have understood that science giveth and science taketh away.
But as I write, they are now joining protests to restore Pluto’s status quo ante.
Indeed, Tombaugh was such a thoroughgoing scientist that he was even willing to embrace UFOs, if that’s where the evidence led, saying: “I think that several reputable scientists are being unscientific in refusing to entertain the possibility of extraterrestrial origin and nature.”
Looking for an Unidentified Flying Object, for Tombaugh, was no different from looking for an unidentified moving point of light that might be a planet. That’s in fact how his work at the Lowell Observatory in 1929 led to Pluto the following year.
Science today is not in Tombaugh’s league. Today, theory precedes fact and hypothesis is hyped to a right of way.
Why don’t we have eyes in the back of our heads? If we “evolved” in adaptation to our environments, if that is how nature selects for survival, shouldn’t we have at least one eye smack in the back of the head, capable of seeing through hair, to serve as a unique “detector” in the generational night vision of our long nightmare to survive?
Isn’t that exactly what would illuminate the role of the eye as an adaptation, exactly as evolutionists in fact insist? So where’s the anti-predator “hidden eye”?
Why do we have one heart but two kidneys? Let’s tally up the heart condition/ kidney disease totals across all manner of generations. Which would have served us better – a spare heart or that second kidney?
What about that appendix? Why has that uniquely useless bit of goods not fused, “evolved” into something like a spare organ, like a spare button on a shirt? What, it needs more time? Another, say, few million years?
When will we finally fly in the air like birds? We broke from the avian line of our common, distant ancestry, so we could end up flightless and grounded by the most lethal of all industries, bar none: transportation? What’s with that? Did we mis-adapt, big time?
Tombaugh would not have censored these questions. He would have invented them. His interest was inquiry, truly seeking to learn.
Darwin has been turned into dogma by secularist extremists who hold hostage our educational systems, complete with tax-funded captive audiences, our young.
No wonder. We now hear that Pluto is off to forge some same-sex bond with ol’ Charlie boy. Charlie serves all purposes from all positions, you see.
Pluto’s argument now is that there is more to size than just plain size, that his size is to be viewed in terms of a complex adaptation as a function of the furthermost distance from the sun. Only reclassification back to full planetary status can adequately capture this mathematics of intergalactic nuance: S = (f) D²; S(size) is a f(function) of the square of D(distance).
Please forgive. I told you. Pluto is pissed.