{"id":279879,"date":"2017-02-27T08:10:04","date_gmt":"2017-02-27T12:10:04","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/spaceweekly.com\/?guid=fffafb62ea2bfe6f3fa29371f3984cec"},"modified":"2017-02-27T08:10:04","modified_gmt":"2017-02-27T12:10:04","slug":"study-suggests-we-reclassify-the-moon-as-a-planet-reopening-a-centuries-old-debate","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/spaceweekly.com\/?p=279879","title":{"rendered":"Study suggests we reclassify the moon as a planet\u2014reopening a centuries-old debate"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Every now and then a scientific paper makes a real splash. We had one recently, to judge from recent headlines. &#8220;Moon rises to claim its place as a planet&#8221; said The Sunday Times on February 19, while the Mail Online asked &#8220;Is this lunarcy?&#8221;. The articles were among many responding to the humble paper: &#8220;A Geophysical Planet Definition&#8221;, which suggested that the criteria for determining what constitutes a planet need an overhaul. It argued that the moon, Pluto and several other bodies in the solar system should be upgraded to planets.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Every now and then a scientific paper makes a real splash. We had one recently, to judge from recent headlines. &#8220;Moon rises to claim its place as a planet&#8221; said The Sunday Times on February 19, while the Mail Online asked &#8220;Is this lunarcy?&#8221;. The articl&#8230;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":0,"featured_media":615444,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-279879","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/spaceweekly.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/279879","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/spaceweekly.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/spaceweekly.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/spaceweekly.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=279879"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/spaceweekly.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/279879\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":279880,"href":"https:\/\/spaceweekly.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/279879\/revisions\/279880"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/spaceweekly.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/615444"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/spaceweekly.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=279879"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/spaceweekly.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=279879"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/spaceweekly.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=279879"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}