Read "foreign units" as "Commonwealth spellings" of meter and liter by misguided interpreters of well established USA laws and practices which only supplement but do not contradict "official" SI.
Gene. ---- Original message ---- >Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2011 13:35:01 -0500 >From: "Kilopascal" <[email protected]> >Subject: [USMA:49649] how does spelling relate to metrication >To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]> > > If only it were true that foreign units of measure > were being imposed on America. Believe me no one in > the world is going to force the US to metricate. In > fact it is in their best interests if America never > does. What better way to out-compete, out-perform; > out-innovate; out-produce the US? And America's > competition knows this. > > What better way for the world to keep the tools of > progress out of America's hands then by simply not > insisting that America metricate. > > The reason SI failed in the US in the '70s was that > America was choosing the "soft conversion" method of > metrication as opposed to the hard. The opponents > picked this up and was able to convince the general > public that nothing would really change but the > numbers and the words. We would be measuring in > increments of 25.4 millimetres instead of 1 inch. > We would drive in increments of 1.609344 kilometres > instead of 1 mile. We would buy food in increments > and decrements of 0.45359237 kilograms instead of 1 > pound, etc, etc, etc. > > What a nightmare this would have been if true and no > wonder people to this day in the US hate the metric > system. Those countries that metricated > successfully took the hard conversion approach. To > this day America is still stuck in the soft > conversion mode. The US however can be thankful to > the importers of world products that the producers > in Asia and Europe decided to change the products so > that the numbers would be round and in some cases > even tossed the old into the rubbish. > > Clinging to conversion factors that are long and > nonsensical is a major part of the problem. Not > getting rid of the legal status of old units and > maintaining conversion factors with long strings of > decimal dust is guaranteed to keep SI out at least > until the rest of the world passes the US by more so > than it is now. But then there has to be a voice in > the wind that will be able to connect the dots and > prove to America that hard metrication is their only > salvation. I don't expect that voice to come from > the outside, nor from pro-metric supporters or > businesses in the US. > > > > > [USMA:49649] how does spelling relate to metrication > > mechtly > Thu, 27 Jan 2011 09:36:56 -0800 > > In [USMA:49615], Ron Stone asked "how does spelling relate to metrication" ? > > Answer: *Hostility* to metrication is aroused when familiar words are spelled > in a way that suggests that *foreign* units of measurement are being imposed > on the people of the Unites States of America. > > All of us here know that SI prescribes only symbols, not spellings. > > However, the false perception of many uninformed members of the public is that > SI is foreign, and that metrication requires difficult *conversion" > calculations. > > In reality SI is easy to learn and use. Only the *transition* to SI can > sometimes be a temporary numerical burden. > > Gene Mechtly
