Re:Not a good precedent to set (Score 1)

While caffeinated_bunsen makes a good distinction about the value of groupthink in coming to common definitions of words, this isn't just a question of definitions. The definition of "planet" exists, though it may not be 100% settled. It is not a definitional truth that Pluto is a planet; rather it is a planet if and because its physical characteristics fit within the definition of "planet". In fact, none of this is relevant, as the real point is that the museum has overstepped its bounds by taking a contentious, minority position, and not even acknowledging what it is doing. This is simply deceitful. If the scientists who helped develop the displays and explanations were to try to publish an academic article that simply assumed, without argument and without even acknowledging that they were taking a minority view, that Pluto does not qualify for "planet" status, the editors and peer reviewers would laugh them out of town. But because they are dealing with the public, they feel it's ok to be, at best, sloppy and egregiously incomplete.