8 planets is a perfectly fine argument as long as you admit you're going on notability or ease of observation
9 planets is just being a boomer
7 planets because Mercury is just an inner system dwarf planet is a stance I can respect
18 planets makes sense if you think confirmed dwarf planets count
but 749 planets by cramming all potential dwarf planets into the count is the funniest stance to take
Replying to @Nerts@yiff.life
imo "planet" isn't really a useful scientific term, you have a number of names that are easy to remember in one category and 9 billion rocks in the other, I think we can deal with calling it 9 billion and something rocks and 4 non-rocks with a star in the middle
Replying to @Nerts@yiff.life
they literally take up 156 parts per million of the solar system by mass, why does anyone give a shit about naming rocks? come on now
Replying to @Nerts@yiff.life
accidentally slipping into macro furry bullshit and going "oh, you name your pet rocks?" to astronomers
