From RationalWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Icon astronomy.svg

This Astronomy related article has not received a brainstar for quality. Please consider expanding the article appropriately. See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information.


Someone less lazy than me might updated this to mention the moons P4 and P5. Marasmusine (talk) 11:57, 27 July 2012 (UTC)


One can see how the misreadings/miscalculations of Neptune's orbit could occur - but how come Pluto happened to be in the right place at the right time? Has anyone claimed aliensdidit, and suchlike Plutonic mumbo-jumbo? (talk) 16:06, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

Probably because there are a lot of trans-Neptunian objects. The likelihood of there being something "in the right place at the right time" was not zero even if the calculations were wrong.--ZooGuard (talk) 17:08, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

Operation Pluto[edit]

Should there be references to [1]? (talk) 16:38, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

It's irrelevant to the mission, and this article is already only tangentially relevant.--ZooGuard (talk) 17:08, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

Conservapedia on Pluto[edit]

The article lists only three of the moons; and the In The News has (14/7/15) three references to Pluto being a recent creation - [2] suggesting a Velikovskian birth from Earth creating the Flood. (talk) 21:40, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Young Earth Creationists at it again[edit]

So it seems that within days (or likely hours) of detailed photographs of Pluto's surface being released, some YECs are already declaring it evidence of an early creation, simply because the surface "looks" young. Would anyone like to take a crack at adding a more detailed description of this to the article, as well as a rebuttal? Nergali (talk) 20:47, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

Give us some time, as actual science and scientific responses tend to take more time than bullshit.--"Paravant" Talk & Contribs 21:02, 23 July 2015 (UTC)


Following on from the successful landing of 'Perseverance' on Mars, with its visible shadow - how much of a shadow would the theoretical Pluto Lander 1 cast? From eg [3] there is 'sufficient light to fit the definition of gloaming.'

Would it be reasonable to assume that PL1 would be doing some Plutonic-geology/soil experiments at both 'local natural light' and 'enhanced/artificial light' levels - as some 'soil chemicals' would only be stable under the former. Anna Livia (talk) 12:58, 19 February 2021 (UTC)