I don't feel that Louis's questions are all that far off the topic of this forum, Gene. There are at least two fundamental problems, though these are not the only ones. First, our educational systems do not require all students to study physics in a great enough depth to understand the quantities of nature. Those quantities are the very ones that the SI provides units for. Until one understands the distinctions between mass and weight and between power and energy, we are having to teach physics along with the SI. Secondly, the data is not amenable for easy comprehension, even by well educated people. By the time this message gets sent out by the mail list server, a previous message of mine to the EIA will have been sent out. In that message I address the difficulty that our hodgepodge of units creates in comparing data. Given that most Americans are very weak in scientific literacy (starting with and especially in physics) and that they cannot compare data which are not in compatible and easily comparable units of measure, it is a moot point whether they are so motivated as to do any independent thinking on issues such as global warming, CO2 emissions, and the like. Even if they suddenly wanted to, they would not be equipped to look at the data and come to well founded decisions. Thus, they get swayed by sound bytes from politicians, by reports from innumerate and scientifically illiterate journalists, and by advertisements. Thomas Jefferson told us that a well educated and well informed public was necessary for democracy to perform well. Sic semper indoctis, ineptis stulti inducemur.* Jim *Thus always for the uneducated, they will be fools led by the inept. Gene Mechtly wrote: > > On Tue, 24 Jul 2001, Louis JOURDAN wrote: > > > > ... practically all countries in the world have adopted SI, but the USA. > > > > What does that mean ? Arrogance, or simple stupidity ? > > Arrogance? Yes. Too much complacent boasting by US elected officials. > > But most elected *and appointed* officials are not stupid. They simply > do not risk leading on not-yet-popular initiatives such as enforcing > existing requirements for SI. It is safer for their careers to promote > already popular causes; usually, increased benefits for favored groups > (e.g. producers of steel, sugar, cotton, grains, etc. and certain > consumer groups such as senior citizens of which I am sometimes ashamed > to be a member); benefits ultimately financed by all taxpayers. > > > ... > > I beg indulgency to my American friends : I did not want to offend > > them... > > No offense, Louis. Your honest opinions are welcome. > > However, please do not dilute this Forum on SI with debate (potentially > heated and endless) on carbon dioxide emissions and global warming, > unless you have quantitative measurements to report (in SI, of course). > > Gene. -- Metric Methods(SM) "Don't be late to metricate!" James R. Frysinger, CAMS http://www.metricmethods.com/ 10 Captiva Row e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Charleston, SC 29407 phone/FAX: 843.225.6789
