Title: Re: [USMA:34395] Re: Post and Courier (Charleston, SC)
Dear Jim,
Congratulations on your handling of the interview and working with Bo Peterson to achieve such a positive result.
I have written to Bo Peterson telling him how much I enjoyed his article and sending him a copy of 'Don't use metric!' (see http://metricationmatters.com/articles )
Cheers,
Pat Naughtin
PO Box 305 Belmont 3216
Geelong, Australia
61 3 5241 2008
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.metricationmatters.com
This email and its attachments are for the sole use of the addressee and may contain information that is confidential and/or legally privileged. This email and its attachments are subject to copyright and should not be partly or wholly reproduced without the consent of the copyright owner. Any unauthorised use of disclosure of this email or its attachments is prohibited. If you receive this email in error, please immediately delete it from your system and notify the sender by return email.
on 2005-09-10 12.18, James R. Frysinger at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Folks,
>
> That interview was as interesting in the lead up to it as it was in the
> conduct. Bo Peterson had called me for some technical advice on sea breezes
> (a topic of my master's thesis). I had told him that I liked a lot of what he
> wrote and I asked him when he was going to write a piece for the paper on the
> metric system's inevitable adoption in the U.S. His immediate response was
> that he hoped it never would! We chatted for a bit and I apparently piqued
> his interest enough that he went to the editor for the go-ahead for this
> article.
>
> Bo entered the interview stating total lack of knowledge on and use of the
> metric system. I dispelled those errors in his self-appraisal during the hour
> that we chatted. His last question, wrapped in a pre-apology, was "Pardon me
> for asking this, but are you a nut?" That gave me the opening to review some
> points and to remind him that I was on the side of 96 % of the people in the
> world. And that if I were a nut, every "sane" American would then have to
> give up those many things we had talked about: electricity, medicine,
> nutrition, and so forth.
>
> In all, I was pleasantly surprised to see such a positively written article. I
> had feared that it would be one of those "you won't believe what some folks
> think!" articles. He even did further research to back up some of my
> assertions in that interview.
>
> I think Bo truly had an epiphany during that interview. Please treat him
> kindly! Yes, I did stress that we did not teach the metric system by use of
> conversions; that "quiz" was just an old "blankie" that he was not ready to
> let go of yet. Bo is just at the start of the learning curve on this. Most of
> us --- at least the older ones among us --- were at some time in the past.
>
> Jim
>
> On Friday 09 September 2005 19:29, Remek Kocz wrote:
>> As riddled with errors as this article is, I do appreciate that another
>> journalist is presenting SI as a rational, coherent, and
>> an easy-to-use measurement system. I'm also glad to see that financial
>> consequences of _not_ adopting the metric system have been brought up. It's
>> an argument that the pro-metric side must make time and time again. Like it
>> or not, money is the most persuasive argument for converting the US.
>> Politicians can translate it to jobs, and businesses can equate it to
>> revenue and profit. Voter and consumer can then vote with their ballot and
>> dollar.
>>
>> On 9/9/05, Nat Hager III <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> Did Jim's interview here make it onto our list?
>>> Nat
>>> The Post and Courier (Charleston, SC)
>>> The Post and Courier (Charleston, SC)
>>> August 29, 2005 Monday FINAL Edition
>>> Correction Appended
>>> *SECTION:* LOCAL/ STATE; Pg. 1B
>>>
>>> *LENGTH:* 715 words
>>>
>>> *HEADLINE:* The pound takes a pounding AH: Is metric really the future
>>> for U.S.? Some predict so
>>>
>>> *BYLINE:* BO PETERSEN Of The Post and Courier Staff
>>>
>>> *BODY:*
>>> The jigger is up.
>>>
>>> In fact, so is the teaspoon, the pint, the foot, the yard and likely the
>>> mile. It's metricate or stay home. That's what Jim Frysinger thinks, and
>>> he's not alone.
>>>
>>> <snip>
