All, Perhaps CNN should be referred to the AP Stylebook which gives conversion factors, although not for cubic miles. Anyone who is slightly numerate should be able to extrapolate from the tables in the stylebook to arrive at conversion factors. When we write to the media maybe we could quote from the AP stylebook: "metric system. In general, metric terms should be included in a story when they are relevant. There are no hard-and-fast rules on when they are relevant, but the following two guidelines have been developed to cover questions likely to arise as metric measurements gain increased acceptance in the United States: - Use metric terms when they are the primary form in which the source of a story has provided statistics. Follow the metric units with equivalents in the terms more widely known in the United States. Normally, the equivalent should be in parentheses after the metric figure. A general statement such as: A kilometer equals about five-eighths of a mile, would be acceptable, however, to avoid repeated use of parenthetical equivalents in a story that uses kilometers many times. - Provide metric equivalents for traditional forms if a metric unit has become widely known. As speedometers with kilometer markings become more prevalent, for example, a story about speed limits might list miles per hour and provide kilometers per hour in parentheses." Baron Carter -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, 15 February, 2001 08:08 To: U.S. Metric Association Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [USMA:11022] Re: Strange Conversion Factors in CNN/AP Article USMA 10875: >The following letter was sent to AP and to CNN. > >Satellites reveal shrinkage of polar ice sheet > >February 2, 2001 >Web posted at: 11:43 AM EST (1643 GMT) >http://www.cnn.com/2001/TECH/science/02/02/sci.meltingice.ap/index.html > >WASHINGTON (AP) -- >... >Now, satellite studies show that about 7.5 cubic miles (12 cubic km) of >ice have eroded from a key area in just eight years. >... >It covers 740,000 square miles (1,184,000 square km) of the frozen continent. >... >Antarctica contains about 7.2 million cubic miles (11.5 cubic km) of ice, > >---- >Above are three horrible errors made in this article. > >Quite simply, you cannot divide square and cubic km by 1.609*344 and >expect to get square or cubic miles. > >1 mile = 1.6 km >1 mi" = 2.59 km" >and >1 mi" = 4.168 km" > >One must square or cube the conversion factor in order to achieve the >correct answer. > >Knowing that the research was done by professional scientists (and I truly >hope that this article was NOT written by a >professional journalist... if so how many other gross errors are there!) I >would have to assume that the correct figures are the >metric numbers. > >Note that 12 km" is 2.9 mi", not 7.5 mi" (a difference of 4.6 mi"!); >1,184,000 km" is 457,000 mi", not 740,000 (a difference of >283,000 mi"!); and 11.5 million km" is 2.8 million mi", not 7.2 million (a >difference of 4.4 million mi"!) > >For this very reason America should adopt the metric system. How many >other errors does AP report when the editorial staff >cannot understand simple mathematics. If you report the correct, original, >metric values only then there would be no need to tax >your mental abilities to translate the values to those that Americans can >supposedly understand better. We already saw a >multimillion-dollar fiasco at NASA when they were unable to convert from >English values to proper metric values. > >Please don't insult us by assuming we don't understand metric quantities. >Please don't insult us with your ignorance. Please clean >up your act and report metric stories in metric only. > >Sincerely, > >Gregory Peterson > > >>>> "Bill Potts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2001-02-05 09:30:44 >>> >See the report at >http://www.cnn.com/2001/TECH/science/02/02/sci.meltingice.ap/index.html. > >Apparently, either AP or CNN has forgotten that the conversion factor from >cubic miles to cubic kilometers is the cube of the miles to kilometers >conversion factor: > > "Now, satellite studies show that about 7.5 cubic > miles (12 cubic km) of ice have eroded from a key > area in just eight years." > >Also, one of their conversions is out by a factor of about 2.5 million: > > "Antarctica contains about 7.2 million cubic miles > (11.5 cubic km) of ice ..." > >I'd write them, but I'm pressed for time at the moment. Anyone else like to >have a go at them? > >Bill Potts, CMS >San Jose, CA >http://metric1.org [SI Navigator] Joseph B. Reid 17 Glebe Road West Toronto M5P 1C8 Tel. 416 486-6071
