Well, the article starts with a misspelling of Protagoras (twice) and goes downhill from there.
By the way, this was an occasion where it would have been more appropriate to use HTML formatting for your message. The conversion to plain text eliminated the recognizability of the exponents in the oft-repeated "humorous" conversions. Bill Potts, CMS Roseville, CA http://metric1.org [SI Navigator] >-----Original Message----- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Behalf Of Nat Hager III >Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2004 14:03 >To: U.S. Metric Association >Subject: [USMA:28340] Edmonton Journal > > >Circulating on Canadian media the last week.... > >Nat > >--------------------- > >2004 CanWest Interactive, a division of >CanWest Global Communications Corp. >All Rights Reserved >Edmonton Journal (Alberta) > >January 16, 2004 Friday Final Edition > >SECTION: Life; Dateline Histor!ca; Pg. C3 > >LENGTH: 725 words > >HEADLINE: Metric system wonderfully logical, but violates ancient >philosopher's rule: Dislike of metrication rooted in desire to relate >things to human scale > >SOURCE: For CanWest News Service > >BYLINE: Laura Neilson Bonikowsky > >BODY: >"Man is the measure of all things," said the Greek philosopher >Protagorus. While Protagorus referred to morality, not size or distance, >the anthropocentric approach has been fundamental to measurement. > >Perhaps this desire to relate things to the human body explains why the >metric system, based on logic, has been difficult for many to adopt. > >Canada legalized the metric system in 1871, although the imperial system >predominated for 100 years. Increasing international trade in the 1960s >made an international system of weights and measures necessary. > >In January 1970, Pierre Trudeau's government decreed, with the white >paper on metric conversion, that a single system of measurement based on >metric units would become Canada's official measurement standard. > >To facilitate the change, the government, as governments are wont to do, >established a commission, the preparatory commission. The commission >established more than 100 sector committees, which then debated how to >proceed. Confusion reigned across the land. > >Those who were school kids in the 1970s undoubtedly recall math classes >wherein we were metricated -- or is that metrified? > >We no longer had to know that 12 inches equal one foot, three feet equal >one yard, 1,760 yards (5,280 feet) equal one mile. The decimal-based >metric system was easier to remember and to multiply. Ten centimetres >equal one decimetre, or 0.1 metre, while 10 metres equal one decametre >and 1,000 metres equal one kilometre. Or is that a decibel and a >kilogram? Parents despaired of helping their children with homework. > >It didn't help knowing that the metre had changed. In 1799, it was fixed >as one 10-millionth part of a quadrant of the Earth's meridian. In 1983, >it was redefined as the distance light travels in a vacuum in one >299,792,458th of a second. > >By 1975, packaging used millilitres or grams instead of ounces. Weather >forecasts were in Celsius instead of Fahrenheit. We weren't sure how hot >30 degrees was, but forecasts weren't more accurate. > >By the end of 1977, all road signs were metric and new cars sold in >Canada had metric odometers and speedometers. American tourists, seeing >the "km/h" signs, likely thought they meant "Kanadian miles per hour." >While Canadians were reluctantly going metric, Americans defied the >system's apparent logic. Australians and Britons resisted its inception >until they could resist no more. > >If the system is so simple and logical, why did people resist it? It >could be mere dislike of change, but this resistance implies that >egocentricity causes us to reject anything not related to the human >body. > >The metric system is, say its opponents, a cold, contrived and >scientific way of measuring the world that denies humanity's relation to >nature. > >It was, indeed, invented. In 1585, Simon Stevin suggested that a decimal >system be used for measurements. Gabriel Mouton, a French vicar, is >credited with devising the metric system in 1670. > >Long before that, human proportions determined measurements. > >The first known measurement, the Egyptian cubit, was the length of a >man's arm from elbow to outstretched middle fingertip. The cubit was >divided into the span of the hand (1/2 cubit), the width of the hand >(1/6) and the finger-width (1/24). > >Of course, cubits varied depending on the arm used, but it was >standardized by 2500 BC. Our imperial foot derives from this Egyptian >standard. The cubit became the Greek Pythic foot, and later was divided >into 12 inches by the Romans. > >Although Canadians have lived with the metric system for 30 years, we >have not been completely metricated. We still measure our homes in >square feet, buy lumber in imperial measures, and define our fuel >consumption as mileage. > >Sometimes we mix the two: "Add contents to 1,000 mL of boiling water. >Makes four one-cup servings." > >Laura Neilson Bonikowsky is the associate editor of the Canadian >Encyclopedia. To learn more about metric conversion, consult the >Canadian Encyclopedia, available on-line at http://www.histori.ca > >- - - > >METRIC MADE EASY > >Here are some simple metric conversions: > >- 1,012 microphones = 1 megaphone > >- 106 bicycles = two megacycles > >- 2,000 mockingbirds = two kilomockingbirds > >- 52 cards = one decacards > >- 1/2 lavatory = one demijohn > >- 454 graham crackers = one pound cake > >- four nickels = two paradigms > >- two wharves = one paradox > >GRAPHIC: Photo: Shaughn Butts, The Journal, File; The metric system has >been official in Canada for decades, but many Canadians still use >imperial measurements. >
