It's just that, from time to time, Bill (or Barbara) I hear the lame excuse from imperial types that the whole metric system is based on a measurement 'proved' to be inaccurate!! I know myself that this is obviously reactionary rubbish, but I like to be armed with as many facts as possible to counter these ludicrous claims; and what better way to do that than to ask those in the know from time to time?? With the Metric Martyr's case, much of this type of thing is being touted in newspapers and other media as fact by certain people and, unfortunately, all too many are falling for it!! Therefore, as said above, it's good to be able to counter this nonsense with the truth!! Regards, Steve. [EMAIL PROTECTED] ----- Original Message ----- From: "Barbara and/or Bill Hooper" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Stephen Davis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2002 9:58 PM Subject: Re: [USMA:18353] Inacurracy of the original metre unit!! > on 2/22/2002 7:39 PM, Stephen Davis at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > I'm sure this topic has been discussed before but I have heard it said a few > > times that due to certain conditions, the original equation of the measurement > > from France to the North pole (or was it the South pole) for the metre was > > inaccurate!! > > It ws from the North Pole to the Equator along a line of longitude through > Paris. > > When you say it was inaccurate, are you suggesting that there were outright > mistakes, other than just the unavoidable imperfections of all measurement? > > I don't know how inaccurate it was but surely there are always inaccuracies. > The degree of inaccuracy can be reduced with improved methods and > technology, but the inaccuracies can never totally eliminated. > > Regards, > Bill Hooper > > -------------------------------------- > "Simplification" begins with "SI" > -------------------------------------- > > > >
