2002-03-11 The problem is those little drops can evaporate before they hit the ground. And our enemies, are using every effort at their disposal to keep FFU not only alive, but to reverse any and all metric gains over the past 200 years. I'm sure they write to every company and organisation and threaten boycotts or whatever if FFU is not used solely. They say they aren't anti-metric and only want a choice, but they have been very instrumental in even keeping metric as a secondary indicator out of many areas.
Why we sit here and talk of dribbles and drops, they are fighting an all out war with heavy ammunition. They have nothing to lose by trying. They may not win, but if they have the economic might, they can and will continue to sabotage every gain SI may make. I'm just hoping the EU can become the power we need fast enough to overpower these luddites once and for all. John ----- Original Message ----- From: "Duncan Bath" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "kilopascal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, 2002-03-11 19:54 Subject: Re: [USMA:18680] Fw: Modern Measures > Well, you know, that dripping of H2O can drill through stone. > Each person who has to deal with messages such as mine, receives a reminder. > Duncan. > > -----Original Message----- > From: kilopascal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; U.S. Metric Association > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: March 11, 2002 18:15 > Subject: Re: [USMA:18680] Fw: Modern Measures > > > >2002-03-11 > > > >This typical response is beginning to feel like a form letter. It seems > >every business, no matter where in the world they come from seem satisfied > >that this response is all that is needed to end the question as to what > >units are to be "standard". All one has to do is claim that Americans are > >their major customer and the use of FFU is justified. > > > >Notice, they don't even attempt to put metric on the page, even as a > >secondary indicator. They want you to make the effort to link to a > >converter to translate to SI. They are so afraid that SI numbers will look > >more sensible than FFU they can't dare let the public see it, for fear of > >scaring them away. > > > >What a joke! > > > >John > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >----- Original Message ----- > >From: "Duncan Bath" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Sent: Monday, 2002-03-11 16:34 > >Subject: [USMA:18680] Fw: Modern Measures > > > > > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Info Intrav <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> To: Duncan Bath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> Date: March 11, 2002 14:18 > >> Subject: RE: Modern Measures > >> > >> > >> >Thank you for your e-mail. Approximately 90% of our passengers are from > >> >the United States, where this is the common unit of measurement. We do > >> >provide a link to a measurement converter on our site at > >> > >>http://www.intrav.com/index.asp?Navigation=news/nav.asp&Content=news/links > . > >> a > >> >sp > >> > which we hope will be useful for those who do not normally use these > >> >units of measure. > >> > > >> >We sincerely appreciate your comments and understand your reasoning. > >Thank > >> >you for your interest in Intrav. > >> > > >> >Cordially, > >> > > >> >Linda Hall > >> >Intrav/Clipper Cruise Line > >> > > >> >-----Original Message----- > >> >From: Duncan Bath [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > >> >Sent: Sunday, March 10, 2002 11:03 AM > >> >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> >Subject: Fw: [USMA:18661] Modern Measures > >> > > >> >-----Original Message----- > >> >From: Duncan Bath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> >Date: March 10, 2002 11:22 > >> >Subject: [USMA:18661] Modern Measures > >> > > >> >I have just received an INTRAV travel brochure entitled "Ancient > >Treasures > >> >of China and the Yangtze River" (via the University of Alberta). > >> > > >> >I was astonished to note that numerical information was given in > >> >old-fashioned feet, acres, miles etc. This despite the fact that 95% of > >> the > >> >world's population uses SI measures. Just to give a 'flavor' of the > >> >contrasts in the two ways of 'doing numbers', please see a comparison of > >> >"700-acre" [Pg. 2] and 285-hectare. > >> > > >> > Sq.ft. Acres Sq.mi. > >> >30,492,000 700 1.09 > >> > > >> > m^2 hm^2 (ha) km^2 > >> >2,850,000 285 2.85 > >> > > >> >It can be seen that the customary way involves a mismatched mixture of > >> >units. > >> >The SI way has an obvious harmony inherent in it. > >> >In China, they do it the SI way. > >> >Why not emphasize the lure of far away places by using their measures > >> >rather than pretending that 'everyone' uses feet, acres, miles etc.? > >> >Duncan > >> >DT Bath, 861 Kensington Dr., Peterborough ON K9J 6J8 > >> >(705)743-4297 > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > > >
