Since they (National Geographic) used the word "loose" in that context, they
also don't know how to use proper English grammar.
One loses (not "looses") a customer, but one can loose (meaning to release) a
barrage. I wonder if they also print such beauties as "greenhouse gasses"
instead of "greenhouse gases?"
-- Jason
----- Original Message -----
From: Richard M
To: U.S. Metric Association
Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2007 12:24 AM
Subject: [USMA:37858] Re: Drives me crazy!
I just received a response back from National Geographic about a letter I
sent them about a month ago. I wrote telling them that I expect a magazine of
their caliber to use the SI system, or at the very least to at least put SI
when the original measurement was SI and to relegate 'customary' to a secondary
position. I told them if they switch to SI (or at least use primary metric and
relegate non-metric to secondary) I will immediately sign back up to receive
there publication.
The response I received, to sum it up in once sentence, was "Thank you for
writing to us about SI; we are sorry to loose you as a customer".
I don't agree with the statement that National Geographic is 'dumbing down'
units. That would imply that they are changing from a hard to understand
system to a much easier system for the common person, so easy that even a
'dummy' can understand it. Instead National Geographic is often times
'complicating up' the numbers to harder to understand, and often less accurate
due to the conversion, non-metric units.
Richard
On 1/25/07, Harry Wyeth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Another drives-me-nuts product of the National Geographic!
HARRY WYETH
----- Original Message -----
From: Harry Wyeth
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2007 12:18 AM
Subject: Nonsense "traditional" measurements
Dear Editors;
No one, but no one, in the English speaking world measures height in yards.
But on page 142 of the January issue we read about the Arctic travelers
encountering "six yard(s) high" ice blockages. In an article about an
expedition from Russia by Norwegian and South African venturers, would it be
too difficult to tell it the way they experienced it--with metric measurements?
They surely didn't relate to any media that the ice floes were "six yards"
high!
The height was 6 m. The open lead referred to was 400 m wide. The 375
pound sleds were 170 kg. And at the end, they discovered that they were 1000 m
or one km from the North Pole (not 1000 yards!), for heaven's sake.
By dumbing down worldwide metric standard measurements, your editors are
insulting Americans' intelligence.
HARRY WYETH
