I notice one error in third paragraph. The article says "75-milliliter bottles" but it should be 750; perhaps it is only a typo or perhaps John Bemelmans Marciano meant to say 75 centiliters because that is equal to 750 milliliters. Look at a wine or liquor bottle. It clearly says 750 mL usually via raised characters on the glass itself if not on label. Apart from that, I fully agree with sentiment Martin expresses. David Pearl 503-428-4917 www.MetricPioneer.com
----- Message from [email protected] --------- Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2014 12:41:02 -0800 (PST) From: [email protected] Reply-To: Martin Morrison <[email protected]> Subject: [USMA:54503] Time Magazine Article in Favor of Metric To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]> Cc: USMA Column -- Don Hillger <[email protected]>, Gary Brown <[email protected]>, Lorelle Young <[email protected]>, Valerie Antoine <[email protected]>
http://time.com/3633514/why-wont-america-go-metric/ This is the kind of article that we need more of. The author wrote a book on the history of the metric system. What we in the USMA need to imitate more is the statement: "The United States is metric, or at least more metric than most of us realize." This is the point. We should stop wringing our hands that the U.S. is not metric, "one of three countries in the world that are not metricated," as the newspapers always get wrong. No, the U.S. is on a path of conversion that is about 50 per cent completed. There are many other countries on this same path, like Canada and Great Britain, but for some strange reason these countries are never termed "non-metric" as the U.S. always is. No, we're not. The USMA needs to carry the positive message that the U.S. is metric -- by law and by convention, at least half way, if not yet completely so. No one advocates a return to grains and ounces of alcohol. Once a conversion is made for a particularly commodity, no one wants to go back. Martin MorrisonUSMA Columnist
----- End message from [email protected] -----
