Dear All, Over the last few weeks, I have collected 121 reason why people don't want to change to metric. My sources were from Australia, the UK, and the USA.
I have quoted each person's lines verbatim except for some light editing to make sense of them � some were clearly written in anger. The headings (marked with an *) are mine, and they are somewhat arbitrary. I have listed the headings according to their frequency with the smallest first. I would appreciate any additions or comments especially on the way that I have arranged them. Cheers, Pat Naughtin LCAMS Geelong, Australia ____ 121 arguments against SI * I don't want to change my mind (3). SI is unfamiliar to me and the old measures are familiar to me. We have always done it this way. We don't object to metric - we just don't want to change. We simply don't want to change. * Old measures are natural (6). Britain has used both decimal currency and the metric system since 1964. That there is still strong resistance to metrication in England shows that the metric system is not natural. Even after all these years, it has not been accepted. The old measures are natural. A woman wears size five shoes, size twelve dresses, size six gloves, and size thirty-two hats, and she knows all these sizes and she can remember them easily. The old system is natural: my thumb is an inch across; my hand is four inches wide; my foot is about a foot long; and when I pace each step is about a yard and it's about a yard from my nose to the tips of my fingers. The old measures were designed to a natural human scale. The old system may be less rational, but it is more human. The inch was first defined in 1150 by King David I of Scotland as the width of a man's thumb at the base of the nail. Edward I of England redefined the inch in the 13th century to equal three grains of dry and round barley laid end to end. The inspiration for the foot's definition should be obvious. The mile comes from the Latin, 'mille passus', which means a thousand steps. We have a feel for square feet and acres; square metres and hectares just don't make sense. When you convert to metric you get strange numbers - for example, 4 inches comes out at 101.6 millimetres - and that's a lot harder number to say and to deal with than 4 inches. * There's nothing wrong with the old methods (7). Metric doesn't have any fractions. What will we do when we want a half, or a third, or a quarter? Old measures are part of our culture, history, and heritage. SI means that everything will be decimal � eights in a boat race will have to be tens; Beethoven will have to be resurrected to write another symphony; we will have to write two of the apostles out of the bible. SI means we won't get 12 oysters in a dozen any more � we'll only get 10. The old ways are more intuitive than metric. These old measurements remind me of thumbs and feet and paces. They relate to the familiar. I have a mental picture of what they are. We'll get ripped off in the shops because of metric downsizing. * It is old - therefore it is good (8). Inches, pounds, and feet are part of our heritage and as such, they should be retained forever. Measuring in the old units works well. Metric is a sterile evolutionary dead-end. The leading-edge work in fundamental physics has abandoned metric and is using so-called 'natural units'. Metric requires greater numeracy than Metric, but this is a skill to be encouraged! It is part of our culture and history and should not be replaced by a soulless alternative. Old measures arose when they were needed in history and they are the best measures because they were chosen from experience. The old units are part of our heritage. Our weights and measures have been used for centuries in our literature, from Shakespeare to Roald Dahl. Their loss would further weaken understanding and appreciation of this inheritance. The proliferation of apparently unrelated units of measurement in our system is anathema to the tidy minded. However, if it is so bad, why has it survived all these centuries? This 'Think Metric' program failed miserably, because it stressed simply conversion, with no practical application. It had the same effect of mandating a language change from English to Esperanto. * Metric is foreign (11). Compulsory metrication is undemocratic. I found a message board that talks about weather, so I posted a message advocating that weather be given in metric units. The answers given included: 'move to Europe'; 'What are you, boy, one of them foreign national subversives? and 'This is the U.S., we don't need no stinkin' metrics.' Men have the 'macho' thing, which requires them using feet, gallons, and cubic inches, etc, rather than this quiche-eating 'metric' stuff. Metric is for third world countries. Metric is not 'American' or 'English'; it's foreign. People who believe in the metric system are commos. Metric is not American Metric is not British The metric system is foreign - it's just not British. The metric system is foreign - it's un-American. We don't export anything at our company so we don't have to change. Metric is for foreigners. * It is too hard to change (12). All of our old recipe books would become redundant. Halves, quarters, and eighths are better than decimal because all you have to do is halve things. It is too expensive to change to metric. It will take too long a time before we become conversant in metric. Metric units aren't easy for the average person to guesstimate. Our entire inventory is in old units and the transition to totally new stock would take a very long time and would be too expensive. Some things should not change for safety reasons. For example, aircraft should continue to fly in nautical miles and feet. The brain easily accommodates repeated halving (and doubling), which is another way of saying 'powers of two', but powers of ten are anything but natural. We should stick to old measures to save on the cost of retooling. We think that changing to metric would be too difficult. We think that changing would be too expensive. What will happen in our schools, when our kids have to learn both the old ways and the new system? * We should have freedom of choice in measurement (13). International bureaucrats want to build a 'one size fits all' world where it is easier for them to regulate more and more aspects of our lives. Old measurements are more flexible. There is a wider choice of units and a wider choice of conversion factors. SI should not be compulsory The introduction of metric is unauthorised by any democratic process. There has not been a referendum on metric measures. We already have decimal currency. Why do we want everything else to be decimal? What's wrong with variety? We can handle metric; but that doesn't mean we want to ditch the old measures. We could use both measurement methods together at the same time with old measures for some things and SI for others. We do things in metric some of the time. We are flexible here; we can use both methods - the old as well as the new. We need active public support to get the Government to end compulsion, and to give us the freedom to measure how we like. We should be free to choose our measurements We should be given freedom of choice. A citizen should be able to choose what units they choose to use and governments should not be able to stop them. We should have freedom to measure any way we like. We should end compulsory metrication. You can help to restore freedom of choice and to save part of our heritage by writing to your MP and to your local newspaper. The time to speak up is now. We should use be able to use dual methods at the same time. * There are better ways than metric (30). Any method of measurement is OK. We don't need new measures. It is an advantage for children to learn two sets of measurements. Learning fractions at school was good enough for me - so it's good enough for my kids - it'll do 'em good. Now that we have calculators, we don't need to change to metric to save time in calculations. On the farm, we are used to a range of units. Some examples are: inches, links, feet, yards, rods, chains, furlongs, and miles. SI is changing all the time. SI is not natural. SI is scientific and not suitable for everyday living. The English System is based on one of the most basic measurement notions, that of halving and doubling. There are 16 ounces to a pound, which means that if you cut your quarter-pounder in half and then in half again, you have an ounce. Similarly, half of a quart is a pint, half of that a cup and if you halve that three more times, you have a fluid ounce. Half of that is a tablespoonful. Double a quart twice and you get a gallon. The Fahrenheit temperature scale is better than Celsius because its got more degrees on it. This makes it more accurate. The general public are not smart enough to handle metric measures. The Imperial System is more practical because its units were developed from use, rather than by Committee. The metric system is just a rip-off. Metric units are very close to the old ifp units: a metre is really just a long yard, a litre is about the same as a quart, and so are a tonne and a ton. The metric system is not a coherent stable whole (it has internal contradictions and it is in flux) and the US does not use the 'Imperial System'. The metric system is too complicated. It uses the speed of light just to define a metre - who can understand that - everybody could understand what a foot is. The metric system is too rigid; there aren't enough units to be able to choose the best unit for the job you are doing. The metric system seems to always come back to the old values. Look how often they use 300 mm - why not say a foot? What about 30 mL; why not use an ounce? In buildings, they use 1200 mm all the time; what's wrong with four feet? Metric measures are constantly shifting toward the old units. The metric system violates the natural human requirement of subdivision into 3, 4, 6, 8, ... parts. The metric system is also inadequate for the subdivision of the circle, for the 24 hours in the day, the 12 months in the year, and the 32 points of the compass. All these requirements are met by changing the number base from 10 to 12. We need a duodecimal system rather than a decimal system. The old imperial measurements worked very well. They were easy to imagine but they were sometimes difficult to use in calculations. This didn't really matter because few people did many calculations. The old ways of measuring are not bad. Proponents of SI should not attack them. Just because the metric system is better does not mean that USA measures are bad. I'm tired of the constant diatribe against the old methods. The old ways were not inefficient. The whole metric system, which seems to be rational on paper, is irrational in practice. For example, the gram was first defined as a cubic centimetre of water. This was too small, so they switched to a kilogram and defined that, not as 1000 grams of water, but in terms of a platinum cylinder kept in a suburb of Paris. Am I supposed to go to Paris whenever I want a kilogram of cheese? There are more natural number choices rather than 10. Twenty and twelve are better choices. Today, the meter is defined as the length of the path travelled by light in a vacuum in 1/299,792,458-th of a second. Isn't that a handy rule of thumb when buying a string of sausage? We can understand the old ways better than metric. We know we are getting good value when we shop using the old measures. We should have a rich and diverse choice of measurement Why do we have to use a base-10 system? Why can't we use a base-12 system? Tens only divide into twos and fives, but twelves divide into twos, threes, fours, and sixes. With metric things have to be done in tens; we can't get a dozen eggs any more! You have to be clever with numbers to be able to use the metric system. In the old days, everyone could understand feet and inches. * Other people use old measures � so old measures are OK (31). All the sports are reported in feet and pounds. Babies are measured in pounds and ounces. Have a look at the Birth Notices in the local paper. Computers have their screens in inches. Football is still in feet. French and German plumbers use inches. Heights are still in feet. I was in Germany last year and I could buy apples in Pfund. Even the Germans haven't changed fully to metric. In the UK, we have been free to use the metric system for over a century - there are still very few takers. Most people haven't changed to metric yet. My customers don't understand the old measurements and that is good for me; I can tell them what I like, and they'll believe me. My staff is too old and they won't go along with the change to metric. My staff is too young; they will not be able to handle the change to metric. Nobody wants SI. Old measures are the 'industry standard'. Old weights and measures are preferred. Most people, in all age groups, prefer the old weights and measures. Our customers, readers, bosses, clients, etc do not understand the metric system and complain every time we use metric units'. Our national identity (in the USA) is defined by our difference to others, that's why we cling on to the old measures. People like the old ways better. People won't change to metric voluntarily. Politicians actively support and include references in speeches to the old system. The majority of consumers do not understand metric measurement. Moreover, consumers are not demanding that their food products be packaged and labelled using the metric system. The measurement issue will never be decided in a government office. It will be settled at the checkout counter, in grocery stores and kitchens, on the desks of editors and drafters, on shop floors, and on highways. The metric system is becoming more unpopular in Britain. The metric system is for scientists and engineers, and not for us ordinary people. The press support the old measures: pounds, pints, inches, ounces, and feet. The printing trade still uses old measures such as: ems, ens, points, lines, and inches. The U.S.A., with the world's largest economy, uses English feet and inches, pounds and ounces, and intends to continue doing so. Why shouldn't England continue to use them? We can still trade internationally with old weights and measures. We can't work in metric because we talk inches and pounds all the time in our normal life. We do things that are familiar to our customers, readers, bosses, clients, etc. We just have to work in metric - the head office ordered it, but there are plenty of people in my office who would go back and work with the old inches and feet; they reckon it's more natural.
