Let's face it, Pluto is weird. It's got a highly elliptical orbit, two moons (one of which is fully half its size; they actually share the same atmosphere), and it really just doesn't fit with the gas giants that seem to be prevalent in the outer solar system.

Of course, having it be a planet was all fine and dandy, but then we started discovering those things with weird names, like Sedna and Quaoar and Xena... the last one being actually bigger than Pluto. So what, then, constitutes a planet? The definition used to be so simple... anything larger than 1000 km in diameter. This was handy because Pluto just squeaked in above it while Ceres was just below it. Can't have a planet in the middle of the asteroid belt, after all. But now... nobody can seem to agree whether we should call Pluto a planet, or a Kuiper Belt Object.

My vote's for KBO.

i think it is a planet, and as the IAU says it is a planet, it is a planet by default.

It has three moons as of last year.

I vote planet, simply because I want other KBO's to become planets as well.

Whoa, how did my post get lost? I had a whole thing written out about the definition of a planet, and the discovery of Sedna and Quaoar and Xena and stuff...

Oh well.

EDIT: Err... how did this end up as two threads? I'll copy my message over to this one and delete the other one, I think.

EDIT2: I'm an idiot. Ignore this post please.

Yay thread merge!

Since it has enough gravitational force to harbor three moons, I would classify Pluto as a planet. A small one, but a planet none the less.

Where's the cartoon dog option?

planet.

KBO, mainly because it sounds cooler.

But I don't see why we couldn't just call it a planet in the Kuiper Belt?

In the spirit of stubborn 'traditionalism,' I grew up with, had a childhood integrated with, and was taught by the Magic School Bus that Pluto is the 9th planet of the solar system. It was an essential part of establishing playground intelligence in 1st grade to be able to proudly declare "Pluto!" and finish listing the 9 planets in front of the awed other kids.

So, it's a planet. Even the definition of planet changes to exclude it, my definition of planet will inherently include it.

(Would also like to throw in that "Xena" is an unofficial nickname of 2003 UB313, no official name has been submitted yet...)

Here's some compelling evidence that it's a planet: if it wasn't, then what would my very eager mother have just served us nine of?

Ex-Moon

I'll believe what the mighty American space agency thing will say.

technically shouldn't everything orbiting the sun be considered part of the solar system? Just because it's not on the same plane or something is no reason to exclude it

Just because something isn't a planet doesn't mean it's not part of the solar system.

If you're going to bash the U.S. (because your stale jokes never ever get old...) at least be educated about it. NASA doesn't decide this, the IAU does.

KBO
There are other KBOs that are larger, there are asteroids which have satelites and it isn't on the same plane as all other planets. I found the last thing always weird and wasn't quite sure if Pluto should be considered a planet.

I vote for Rupert.

i thought there was an extra planet out in the Kuipar belt. I say planet, cos this object is MASSIVE compared to Pluto.

And as we all know, on this magical planet-X, dinosaurs can do long-division, gravity goes up, and Hiliary Clinton is actually a woman.

if(getThingFlags(source) & 0x8){
  do her}
elseif(getThingFlags(source) & 0x4){
  do other babe}
else{
  do a dude}

too true.



as for now: planet.

I think it is a KBO. However, since we have traditionally called it a planet for the last 30 years (?) or so, we should continue to call it a planet out of ...

*cues Fiddler on the Roof*

TRADITION!! TRADITION!! TRADITION!!

I've never been there so I can't say.