Dear Mr. Tyson. You don't think Pluto is large enough for it to be considered a planet.

I don't think your penis is large enough for you to be considered a man.

Winning: Your brain appears to be damaged, do you require assistance?

No, it was just a penis joke. False alarm.

You see, the idea was that Tyson viewed planet Pluto as too small to be considered a planet. Then his penis, could also be considered to be too small for him to be considered to be of the male gender.

It's kind of a leap, really.

shinysign: You see, the idea was that Tyson viewed planet Pluto as too small to be considered a planet. Then his penis, could also be considered to be too small for him to be considered to be of the male gender.

It's kind of a leap, really.

Now, hypothetically, if a penis became small enough, it could turn into a clitoris, the penis and clitoris are very similar organs. It grows out of the same tissue, it is the hormones that trigger whether the penis will develop or not.

This is essential to the understanding of said joke.

Those were great, it was awesome to read letters from kids who were passionate enough about the subject to write him hate mail. The best part was "write me back but not in cursive because I can't read cursive."

Way to make all the little kids cry, Neil, that make you feel like a big man? (New Window)

RminusQ: Neil deGrasse Tyson is farking awesome.

He doesn't always drink beer but when he does you can be sure it isn't dos equis.

Cheron: RminusQ: Neil deGrasse Tyson is farking awesome.

He doesn't always drink beer but when he does you can be sure it isn't dos equis.

Fermented tears of a million 3rd graders, apparently.

Give a six-year-old a computer and he comes across better than most farkers.

Dear scientest,
What do you call Pluto if its not a planet anymore? If you make it a planet again all the science books will be right. Do poeple live on Pluto? If there are poeple who live there they won't exist. Why can't Pluto be a planet? If it's small doesn't mean that it dont have to be a planet anymore. Some poeple like Pluto. If it doen't exist then they don't have a favorite Planet. Please write back, but not in cursive because I can't read in cursive.
Your friend,
Madeline Trost

o.O

It's nice to see those kids are already of the mistaken belief that science is a body of knowledge rather than a process. Any change in the body of knowledge is a sign that science is suspect, not an indication that the process is self-corrective and properly functioning.

StarTalk Radio, FTW!

I don't give two goddamn farks in a pigs ass what this asshole has to say about Pluto. What gives him the right to decide what is and is not a planet? I SAY ITS A farkING PLANET, PROVE ME WRONG

I'm Your Moon. (new window)

I love the last one:

"... we just have to get over it - thats Science."

/Jeff would be proud

lohphat: sweetmelissa31: lohphat: Why isn't Pluto a planet?

It has a predictble orbit, an atmosphere, and at least three satellites.

There are a lot of other dwarf planets like Pluto in its vicinity, some of which are even larger than it, so the choice is either to include them as regular planets too, or remove Pluto.

Do they have atmospheres and satellites? I want names, buddy. This all sounds Goofy to me.

/do I win?

Sounds like you're talking out of Uranus.

The_Sponge: [i38.photobucket.com image 333x250]

"What's your favorite planet? Mine's the sun!"



Well, actually Harry, it's not a planet it's a star.

Mikey1969: Because someone wanted to be a revisionist... It's fun to redefine stuff that's been common for a hundred years or so, and get to be all superior and claim that everyone else is a moron except you. I see what he did there... He basically said 'Starting tomorrow, I'm right and 70 years of science has been wrong all along!'. He made a new definition and said we all had to comply with it because he's superman.

Fail. Unless troll, then SUCCESS.

I think many farkers could learn a thing or two from Siddiq Canty.

big pig peaches: I think many farkers could learn a thing or two from Siddiq Canty.

Neil's possible reaction to Siddiq:

RminusQ: R.A.Danny: The guy sure made a name for himself. Kinda like a science troll.

Neil deGrasse Tyson is farking awesome. He holds the record for most appearances on The Colbert Report, and is quite possibly the best known popular scientist since Carl Sagan.

nerdy story bro time: I had a hilarious moment with my school's quiz bowl team at practice yesterday when there was a question about "This actor who played a mad scientist in Dr. Horrible's Sing Along Blog, and was the title character in Doogie Howser--" and one kid buzzed and said "Neil deGrasse Tyson." And then everyone laughed at him.

That's not the right answer. He must have been thinking of Neil Armstrong, the first person to fly across the Atlantic.

RminusQ: quite possibly the best known popular scientist since Carl Sagan.


biatch please, not in this OR ANY Parallel Universe.

Mikey1969: lohphat: Why isn't Pluto a planet?

It has a predictble orbit, an atmosphere, and at least three satellites.

Because someone wanted to be a revisionist... It's fun to redefine stuff that's been common for a hundred years or so, and get to be all superior and claim that everyone else is a moron except you. I see what he did there... He basically said 'Starting tomorrow, I'm right and 70 years of science has been wrong all along!'. He made a new definition and said we all had to comply with it because he's superman.

The definition was revised because data gathered over the last 30 years showed that there were far more Pluto-sized objects that previously knows. So many in fact that to include them as planets would make the term meaningless. Scientists like a certain amount of logical consistency when defining things, so when new information calls for a term to be revised they don't "grandfather" old names and classifications.Also, Tyson didn't change the definition, the International Astronomical Union did (you probably missed the memo because you aren't an astronomer and therefore your opinion on the matter is irrelevant (as is mine)).

The new criteria are:

(1) A "planet"1 is a celestial body that: (a) is in orbit around the Sun, (b) has sufficient mass for its self-gravity to overcome rigid body forces so that it assumes a hydrostatic equilibrium (nearly round) shape, and (c) has cleared the neighbourhood around its orbit.

(2) A "dwarf planet" is a celestial body that: (a) is in orbit around the Sun, (b) has sufficient mass for its self-gravity to overcome rigid body forces so that it assumes a hydrostatic equilibrium (nearly round) shape2, (c) has not cleared the neighbourhood around its orbit, and (d) is not a satellite.

(3) All other objects3, except satellites, orbiting the Sun shall be referred to collectively as "Small Solar System Bodies".

/Pluto fails as a planet due to 1c above. If it wanted to be a planet it should have cleared the Kuiper belt of debris and added it to it's mass.

"That's science" is my new response to any conceivable statement

Hate mail? Hard to see how that's hate mail. Oh, wait, we're in the 21st century, where any expression of disagreement or disapproval is hatred. Got it.

Tyrosine: Mikey1969: lohphat: Why isn't Pluto a planet?

It has a predictble orbit, an atmosphere, and at least three satellites.

Because someone wanted to be a revisionist... It's fun to redefine stuff that's been common for a hundred years or so, and get to be all superior and claim that everyone else is a moron except you. I see what he did there... He basically said 'Starting tomorrow, I'm right and 70 years of science has been wrong all along!'. He made a new definition and said we all had to comply with it because he's superman.

The definitiondescription was revised because data gathered over the last 30 years showed that there were far more Pluto-sized objects that previously knows. So many in fact that to include them as planets would make the term meaningless. Scientists like a certain amount of logical consistency when definingdescribing things, so when new information calls for a term to be revised they don't "grandfather" old names and classifications.Also, Tyson didn't change the definitiondescription, the International Astronomical Union did (you probably missed the memo because you aren't an astronomer and therefore your opinion on the matter is irrelevant (as is mine)).

The new criteria are:

(1) A "planet"1 is a celestial body that: (a) is in orbit around the Sun, (b) has sufficient mass for its self-gravity to overcome rigid body forces so that it assumes a hydrostatic equilibrium (nearly round) shape, and (c) has cleared the neighbourhood around its orbit.

(2) A "dwarf planet" is a celestial body that: (a) is in orbit around the Sun, (b) has sufficient mass for its self-gravity to overcome rigid body forces so that it assumes a hydrostatic equilibrium (nearly round) shape2, (c) has not cleared the neighbourhood around its orbit, and (d) is not a satellite.

(3) All other objects3, except satellites, orbiting the Sun shall be referred to collectively as "Small Solar System Bodies".

/Pluto fails as a planet due to 1c above. If it wanted to be a planet it should have cleared the Kuiper ...

Science doesn't define anything.