Great letter Paul.

I just simply sent Mr Keane the following note.


"Your anti-metric article published in the Herald recently makes you sound like 
a moron.  Are you?"

He replied simply, "Yes."

I replied, "Well, at least you're honest."

haha...oh well.



---------- Original Message -----------
From: "Paul Trusten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 18:45:49 -0600
Subject: [USMA:31448] Fw: America needs to measure up to itself

> Someone asked if any letters to Mr. Keane at the Herald resulted. I guess I 
> ought to offer 
> up the one I wrote, below:
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: Paul Trusten 
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2004 20:23
> Subject: America needs to measure up to itself
> 
> Dear  Mr. Keane,
> 
> Thank you for your interesting and useful Boston Herald column concerning the 
> metric 
> system in America.  Your article is very instructive for those like myself 
> who continue to 
> work for adoption of the metric system in the U.S.. For us, you have 
> catalogued concisely 
> the tools of fear, distortion, and jingoism employed by our opposition for 
> decades.  
> 
> You say that the metric system makes no sense, but you say so by using values 
> in the 
> context of another system of measurement in order to confuse, not to educate. 
> Twenty 
> degrees Celsius is in fact the start of spring, 90 centimeters is a 
> reasonable waist size, 
> and 100 kilograms might be considered overweight. Besides being inaccurate, 
> it is unfair 
> to apply these numbers to metric units as if they were associated with other 
> units in 
> order to scare people. 
> 
> The argument about dividing things into thirds is very old and tired. This 
> pressing need 
> to divide things into thirds only seems to come up when an attempt is made to 
> argue 
> against the metric system. How often has division by three ever been an issue 
> for you? On 
> the other hand, having to convert sets of measurements of feet-and-inches to 
> all inches, 
> add the inches, and then convert back to feet and inches is a most cumbersome 
> practice 
> that has bedeviled us Americans for centuries. Why should we continue to be 
> proud of that? 
>  The same decimal system of arithmetic we use to add those inches could be 
> used instead to 
> add millimeters, in one fell swoop, to get the total.
> 
> That the rest of the world uses the metric system might be instructive for 
> the United 
> States. But that is not the primary reason for us to adopt it. We should 
> adopt it because, 
> minus your verbal terrorism, and when it is used by itself, it is easier to 
> use than the 
> "system" we have been using. 
> 
> As far as orneriness being patriotic is concerned, I am attaching to this 
> e-mail the 
> obituary of a man who fought for our country and for the metric system all of 
> his 
> professional life. If, after reading his credentials, you still think that 
> metric is a 
> tool of our enemies, I'd like to know how you arrived at that conclusion. 
> Also, while you 
> deprecate the fact that the metric system is the measurement language of 
> science, our 
> country is now losing the global science pre-eminence it once had. Could this 
> have 
> something to do with the lack of knowledge of the metric system among our 
> students? Now, 
> that is something you should be scaring people with.
> 
> Thank you very much for your kind attention. So as not to end on an adverse 
> note, I am a 
> Boston native, and with this year's Red Sox, I,too, can die in peace!
> 
> Sincerely,
> 
> Paul Trusten
> 3609 Caldera Blvd., Apt. 122
> Midland TX 79707-2872 USA
> 
> August 18, 2004 Wednesday 
> 
> ALL EDITIONS
> 
> SECTION: EDITORIAL; Pg. 027
> 
> LENGTH: 800 words
> 
> HEADLINE: Op-Ed; 
> In America, metric doesn't measure up
> 
> BYLINE: By Thomas M. Keane Jr.
> 
> BODY:
> 
> The temperature outside is 20 degrees centigrade. ``Oh,'' I think, ``I
> better put on a coat.''
> 
> That's the problem with the metric system. None of it makes any sense. A
> gallon of gas is a good amount, but sell it by the liter and I think I'm
> shortchanged. Tell me my waist measures 90 centimeters and I'll go on a
> diet. If my scale says I weigh 100 kilograms, I'm back to eating
> whatever I want. I enjoy a cup of coffee in the United States, but what
> do I drink out of in Europe? 
> 
> For almost 30 years, government officials, insisting it was good for us,
> have been trying to shove the metric medicine down our throats. In all
> that time, seemingly against all rationality, we've resisted,
> obstinately refusing to do as we're told.
> 
> And, I'm pleased to report, we're winning.
> 
> The latest victory comes in Maine. For the last decade, the state has
> mandated that transportation projects had to use metric: speed limits
> posted in kilometers per hour, square kilometers when surveying land,
> centimeters when specifying the dimensions of screws and bolts.
> 
> And now it's retreating.
> 
> Two years ago, Maine officials quietly decided to switch back to good
> old English measurements; the move caught the public eye just this
> summer. It turns out that, all the promises of the metric aficionados
> notwithstanding, metric was confusing and expensive.
> 
> True enough. Five years ago, NASA lost the $125 million Mars orbiter
> because some poor souls used metric instead of English units.
> 
> Ever since Frenchman Gabriel Mouton invented it in 1670, busybodies have
> been trying to push the ever-so-scientific metric system on everyone
> else. They've had much success. Even the Brits caved in 1965. The lone
> holdouts are three: the United States, Myanmar and Liberia.
> 
> This is not good company to keep.
> 
> And for a while, it seemed we too were going to join the fold. Thomas
> Jefferson was advocating metric back in 1790. The first international
> treaty adopting the system was signed in 1875 - the United States was
> even one of the signatories. By 1975, the metric lobby (amazingly
> enough, there really is one) got Congress to pass the Metric Conversion
> Act. That law was supposed to force the United States to switch within
> 10 years. Mysteriously, however, the 10-year deadline somehow was left
> out of the final version of the bill. Metricians got upset and managed
> to get the normally skeptical President Reagan to sign an amendment to
> the law proclaiming metric the ``preferred system of weights and
> measures for United States trade and commerce.'' That was followed by
> various executive orders mandating government agencies adopt the system.
> Some did so enthusiastically - that's why Maine went metric - while
> others passively did nothing.
> 
> Aside from misguided Francophilia, why the big push for metric? Some
> argue it's better because it's a lot easier to multiply and divide by
> 10. I suppose that made sense back in the days when we all calculated
> using pencil and paper. But computers have made most of this irrelevant,
> a point Maine actually noted when it decided to revert back.
> 
> Moreover, a decimal system isn't as easy as it sounds. One can easily
> divide a foot into thirds - 4 inches. But what's a third of a meter?
> 0.33333 - an infinitely repeating decimal. Try measuring that when
> you're about to saw wood.
> 
> When you get down to it, the real reason for the United States to go
> metric seems to be that everyone else does it. Advocates for decades
> have been relentless in arguing that we had to adopt the metric system
> to keep our economy efficient and competitive in international markets.
> 
> That kind of threat is probably why we resist. Much of America's success
> lies in its own exceptionalism, its refusal to take orders from the rest
> of the world and its determination to set its own course. Rather than
> mere inertia, I think our collective refusal to go metric - despite the
> prodding of our political elite - has more to do with our basic
> orneriness.
> 
> So far, it's served us well. We're the world's richest country and its
> only superpower. I suppose some metric advocates think we could have
> done better had we gone along with their schemes, but it's hard to
> imagine how.
> 
> Indeed, I wonder if metric might be a bit like Esperanto, the ``world
> language'' created back in 1887. Americans stubbornly stuck with English
> - heck, most of us refused to learn anyone else's language - and, lo and
> behold, English has now emerged as the de facto international language
> for business and science.
> 
> Who knows? Maybe the rest of the world will eventually abandon
> centimeters and kilograms in favor of inches and pounds. It should.
> 
> A pint of beer has more character than half a liter. And crossing the
> Maine border, it's good to learn that rather than 100 kilometers to L.L.
> Bean's, it's just a short 65 miles away.
> 
> Talk back to Tom Keane at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> LOAD-DATE: August 18, 2004
------- End of Original Message -------

Reply via email to