Why?
Things change all the time Lynx. All the time.
Hell, in Genetic Research alone, new theories come up completely erasing old thoughts and ideas. Stuff that's been around for a long time as well.
Why can't you accept the change?
If people never changed their ideas, we would be living on a flat world right now.
It's not the same thing. Not at all. A theory in the field of Genetics is something that helps us better understand genetics. Old theories disappear because they are proven inaccurate, or a new theory better explains something over the old The definition of a 'planet' doesn't help us understand the universe better. It's just a definition. There isn't much different between a 'planet' and a 'dwarf planet'.
And check your info on the community voting for them. It's a conference held every three years, were the representatives of nations are invited. I'm assuming a representative is someone who is voted into a position. So yes, this is the same exact thing like a Senate.
"The XXVIth General Assembly of the International Astronomical Union was held from August 14 to August 25, 2006 in Prague, Czech Republic.
On 15 August the Assembly decided to restore to individual members the right to vote on scientific matters, which had been removed from them at the XXVth Assembly in 2003. Among the business before the Assembly was a proposal to adopt a formal definition of planet. During the General Assembly the text of the definition evolved from the initial proposal that would have created 12 known planets in our solar system (adding initially the asteroid Ceres, Pluto's present moon Charon, Eris and would retain Pluto as a planet) to the final definition of a planet resolution that was passed on August 24 by the Assembly, which classified Ceres, Eris and Pluto as dwarf planets, and reduced the number of planets in the solar system to 8. The voting procedure followed IAU's Statutes[1] and Working Rules[2]. The General Assembly lasted 12 days and had 2412 participants[3], most of them for only part of the duration of the Assembly. 424 of the 9785 individual IAU members attended the Closing Ceremony 24 August 2006. Following the August 24th, 2006, parts of the scientific community did not agree with this ruling, especially the specific wording of the resolution, and criticized IAU's authority to name celestial bodies. In the ensuing public debate a number of laypersons, especially school children[citation needed], expressed (at times strong emotional) disagreement with the vote. Another, less vocal, fraction of the scientific community backs the resolution, including the discoverer of the would-have-been-the-10th-planet-Eris, Mike Brown."
Out of the 9785 members that were allowed to vote, only 424 voted. So no, it's nothing like what you're saying.
