> I have no evidence or reports to back my claim, but considering > that metric > has been taught in schools since the early 70's, then that would > mean that > everyone approaching 50~60 should know metric. > However, I believe most people in the world don't dwell too much > on the laws > of measurements, they just use the one's that are offered to them > each day > as a 'reference number' - eg 2 litre bottle of coke, 26 PSI in > the tyres, 2 > mm screw, 35 mpg etc etc
A shallow way of looking at it, but even if it were true it hardly supports the claim that the imposition of metric will upset everybody and take something away from them. > I would think that after 40ish years of it being here it would at least > evolve into the pshychie - thus supporting many claims that it's 'easier' > than imperial. Then why have BWMA members been writing to the media complaining of too much metric as if they don't understand it. This only shows their willful ignorance. > Again I have no proof - but I supect that if you asked (UK) > people how many > metres there are in a km then more would get the answer correct > than to the > question 'What's the capital of Australia'. They're certainly more likely to know the answer to either of those questions than the length of a mile in yards. > I bought 2 pairs of trouser (actually, one pair were jeans) in Cologne, > Germany (the most metricated country in the world IMHO) and both > were inch > based, sorted by inches. The seller was quite obviously gay, but > that's a > totally different story! The point here is - the number is a reference > number. In most applications of measurement the masses use these > figures as > reference numbers. Hardly anyone will know that a litre of water at room > temp will have a 'mass' (not weight, mind) of 1 kg. Hardly > anyone will know > that 'Km' is the wrong way of saying 'km' (and that's based upon the > numerous times I've seen KGS, mts, MT, KMS etc etc **ON THE > CONTINENT**). I was talking about the UK where (as you keep telling us) metric is not the norm at a personal level. I still contend that this is just one example that presents obstacles to people learning to use metric properly and realising it's advantages. > The avg joe doesn't know and won't need to know all the rules involved in > buying 0.5 kg of prime angus mince compared to the 'awful, > backward, messy, > antiquated' rule-less way of purchasing a pound of the stuff. > Life is not > that technical to most people. Unless you're a scientist or the like. > Now I realise that for those who make a hobby from metric then > these rules > are important. But to the average person they are as little > importance as > my unipivot tone-arm versus the fixed type would be. It isn't as technical as all that. It's well known that the UK adult population are quite weak at maths and that the problem is not merely academic. An article appeared on the BBC web site a couple of years ago reporting the result of a survey showing that one third of people cannot calculate such things as area, in either metres or feet. A well known TV DIY presenter said that people waste huge amounts of money on decorating because they can't calculate their material requirements. The measurement mess may well be, and probably is, a contributary factor. It is therefore irresponsible for any pressure group to resist a change for the better. > I thnk the major issue for this particular point in the US is to > not do what > we've done in the UK - show measures in millimetres! It looks > quitede messy > having thousands of millimetres as a description of a cupboard! Millimetres should only really be used when that level of precision is actually required but it has become something of a habit for the engineering and construction industry because of BSI recommended practices. Neverthless if it is used it requires very little effort to mentally round it. > > BTW - I don't know if this is uniquely British (and it does go against my > point of mixing measures in the same breath) but I can make a > perfect mind > image of the bracelet you meantion there. Maybe but it requires competence with both sets of incompatible measures. So much for choice. > I hate the EU (I also love Europe, something that certain people in the > EU-servile camp can't and will never understand). But the EU is more > corruptive and dangersous (IMHO!!!) that metres and litres! Your hatred of the EU is a common theme among BWMA members. > With respect I can only disagree with you there (as you'd expect/predict) > BWMA has campaigned for litres to be used in an Austrian pub (in the UK) > this was not a publicity campaign as to suggest so would make assumptions > about the mental health of the Austrian pub owners involved. The case concerning the Austrian theme pub is singularly unimpressive when you consider the rarity of publicans challenging the enforcement of the pint and the lack of pressure to sell in litres. Set that against a much more vigorous campaign of interfering with metric distance signs and allying themselves with that dangerous bunch of fruit cakes called Active Resistance to Metrication, who have no qualms about meddling with hazard warning signs. > They just want parity. > And there's nothing wrong with claiming that imperial is favoured > - the best > poll for that was Tesco's. Parity? They have a funny way of showing it. Just look at the tone of their web site. They talk of "metric idiocy", blaming the metric system for poor measurement practice and "metric ripp offs", where traders have down-sized to rational metric sizes without reducng prices, yet they totally ignore the scams wrought by dual measures where, for example, price reductions are per kilogram but selling prices per pound (Tesco in fact). > All I can say is "40 yrs and counting". > I also must say that I feel the views of UKMA and USMA are > different in many > respects. > Reading "A very British mess" points clearly to quite heavy > handed statist > measures. > So also do their pro-forma letters-to-MPs on their webpage. The aims of USMA and UKMA are the same for their respective countries. Any differences in strategy merely reflect the differences in political, legal and commercial culture they have to deal with. Your views of keeping dual measures and the misguided notion of choice are no less incongruous to USMA than UKMA. If you think that the American association sympathises with your stance of resisting full metrication you are very much mistaken and you won't drive a weg between the two associations no matter how hard you try.
