this post was submitted on 26 Mar 2026
414 points (98.1% liked)

Science Memes

20668 readers
2813 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Meta Post Tags



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.


If you are here asking: "Is this a science meme?"

Probably, yes. We use the Dawkins definition of meme: a replicating idea, not just an image macro with a fact on it. A good post here doesn't need to teach you something. It needs to make you ask something: who, what, where, when, and especially why or how.

Science isn't a filing cabinet of facts, it's a conversation. For example, a photo of an eel or other localized wildlife counts because most people never see one, and wonder is the first step of inquiry. A car meme counts if it makes you curious about what's under the bonnet. If you want to talk about something you noticed in the world, chances are someone else wants to talk about it too.

We moderate for vibe, not category. Pruning is light, especially where a post creates interesting discussion. Experimenting is encouraged.

See the pinned paper on Shitposting as Public Pedagogy if you want the academic case for why this works.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] GraniteM@lemmy.world 3 points 3 months ago (1 children)

My objection to "dwarf planet" is purely a linguistically aesthetic one.

"Dwarf planet" ≠ planet

...implies...

"Dwarf person" ≠ person

...and I feel like the people under 4'10" (147 cm) would object to that distinction.

Also, "planetoid" was a perfectly cromulent word which Star Trek had been using for decades already.

[–] samus12345@sh.itjust.works 3 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Different meanings. "Dwarf person" = a person with dwarfism, but "dwarf planet" ≠ a planet with dwarfism.

[–] GraniteM@lemmy.world 3 points 3 months ago (1 children)

There are plenty of linguistically unintuitive artifacts kicking around (a peanut is neither a pea nor a nut, a jellyfish is not a fish, all of the "berries" which aren't berries), but if we're deliberately creating brand new labels in the 21st century, it might have been nice if we'd avoided that kind of oddness, given the opportunity.

[–] samus12345@sh.itjust.works -1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

It's kind of a leap to hear "dwarf planet" and think that it's denigrating people with dwarfism in any way.

[–] GraniteM@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

It's not a direct connection, but trying to say a dwarf planet isn't a planet, when it's got the word planet right there, is generating the kind of semantic confusion that, carried forward, would lead to the conclusion that people with dwarfism aren't people. The -oid suffix already conveys "is almost the thing, but not quite," such as in words like humanoid, asteroid, android, and (most importantly) the aforementioned planetoid. Making planetoid the official word for "is in ways like a planet but actually isn't" would have been working with existing etymology, rather than creating needless confusion.

[–] samus12345@sh.itjust.works 1 points 3 months ago

I'd certainly support not using "dwarf" in the names of celestial bodies any more, although it would make the Red Dwarf's name anachronistic.

[–] RamenJunkie@midwest.social 1 points 3 months ago

Did you test Pluto to make sure its not just a regularplanet with dwarfism?