[meteorite-list] Planets Galore

From: Michael L Blood <mlblood_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Thu Aug 17 08:13:09 2006
Message-ID: <C109A4F0.2D7C4%mlblood_at_cox.net>

As an Anthropologist and Sociologist
I find myself more interested in WHO
considers these changes in nomenclature
desirable and who considers them undesirable.
        As for myself, I consider sweeping changes
such as this highly undesirable. This fits in with
several elements dealing with human preferances,
which appear to be at least related clear back to
the Order level, as many parallels can be made
to Baboon preferences.
        The primary determinant to acceptance of change
appears to be most closely associated with aging. However,
at what age preferences remain open differ, at least among
humans - US dwellers specifically.
        For instance. Baboons in the later phases of life, particularly
the higher ranking males, will NOT eat new foods, even if the
troup moves (or is relocated) to an area or refuge where many
new and desirable foodstuffs are readily available.
        In the US, people will not try new foods after about the age
of 35. For instance, a Sushi restraint has nearly no hope of making
it among the older diners in the midwest, as most of the population
over 35 have never eaten sushi and, therefore, are not open to trying
it.
        However, such preferences are not limited to foodstuff, and
"new" or "adventurous" behavior is also limited. Music seems to be
one of the most rigid criteria, with preferences beginning at about
14 and lasting only until somewhere between 21 and 30ish. After
that, little "new" styles tend to be accepted and the individual will
forever drift toward the music of his/her "youth." In other things,
ranging from sports to toothpaste the more successful a person is
in a "stable" career, the less flexible they seem to be.
        Therefore, I will choose to view my total resentment of this
"planet" taxonomy revolution as being hogwash due to my long
term successfulness in my chosen fields. (But how do I then explain
my ever growing fascination with new interests????)
        Anyway, food for thought, even if you don't like sushi!
        Michael

on 8/17/06 4:31 AM, Francis Graham at francisgraham_at_rocketmail.com wrote:

> Dear List:
> I enjoyed the debate and conversation on this list
> on the subject of what a definition of a planet is. It
> was not acrimonious and personal, and was very
> interesting and worthwhile.
> Many of us do not care if Ceres is a planet or even
> if the old Apollo rocket stages are called planets
> --well, maybe I stretch it there--, the important
> thing is to have a definition of a term that must be
> used in scholarly journals and go on. Of course common
> usage will differ from the IAU definition, and that is
> OK. After all, we still speak of sunrise and sunset,
> although we no longer regard the Universe as
> Ptolemaic.
> As for astrologers, some will be confused and some
> will see it as a bonanza. That is their concern. This
> list is concerned with the scientific study and other
> aspects of meteorites, and the definition of planet is
> important to this list because meteorites can come
> from some of these bodies.
> The worst possible outcome is to have no definition
> approved. If the definition is later shown to be
> faulty, or fails to optimally facilitate the
> communication of scientific results, it can be
> ammended later.
> There is an analogy to this confusion. In some
> states of the USA people are permitted to marry at a
> young age. Having done so, they move to another state
> without such laws, and are arrested for sex crimes.
> While this is much more a serious non-uniformity
> problem than the definition of a planet, it adequately
> illustrates the problem that nonuniformity creates.
> What one journal calls a planet another will not
> allow, this is akin to the young-marriage problem. A
> popular science writer would have to have a separate
> list of acceptable planets for each editor. It is
> better to have even a mediocre uniformity than
> confusion. And by no means am I necessarily calling
> the proposed definition mediocre. It was clearly
> carefully thought out by many people. But even if it
> were mediocre, I would still favor it because it would
> end confusion on the issue.
> Mars with his war chariot, Jupiter with his
> thunder, it is nice to have little farmer Ceres
> finally joining the retinue.
>
> Francis Graham
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
> ______________________________________________
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list_at_meteoritecentral.com
> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

--
Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than
standing in a garage makes you a car.
--
"Is our children learning?"
"I know the human being and fish can coexist peacefully."
"More and more of our imports come from overseas."
"The very act of spending money can be expensive."
    George W. Bush
--
Blind Faith in bad leadership is NOT Patriotism
--
"Dissent is the highest form of Patriotism."
   Thomas Jefferson
--
What if the hokey pokey is really what it's all about?
  

Received on Thu 17 Aug 2006 07:45:36 AM PDT