Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

 International Skeptics Forum Metric Vs imperial

 User Name Remember Me? Password

 Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
 7th January 2018, 02:09 PM #201 Thor 2 Illuminator     Join Date: May 2016 Location: Brisbane, Aust. Posts: 4,165 Originally Posted by lionking Do you still refer to people's heights in feet and inches? Because I do, and when I ask even young people their height they invariable say 5 ft 10 ins or whatever. Yes that's a hard one to shake compared to the other metric units being accepted more readily. The unit of weight as kilogram makes so much more sense than the stone. A stone is 14 lb. and a lb. is 16 oz .... yes that makes sense? So how do you describe parts of a stone? Being involved in hydraulics in my working life the cubic inch/gallon thing has always been an irritation. 1 US gallon is 231 cubic inches (1 Imperial gallon 277 cubic inches) and hydraulic pump displacement has traditionally been expressed as GPM at 1200 RPM (1200 RPM being synchronous speed for the most common electric motors in the USA*). Hydraulic cylinders have traditionally been made in imperial sizes and the bulk are still that way today. Therefore one is continually calculating volume flow rates in cubic inches/min and converting to US gallons - a real pain. * Synchronous speed of electric motors is determined by the number of poles and the frequency of the alternating current. That frequency is 60 cycles/sec in the USA but 50 in most of the rest of the World. __________________ Thinking is a faith hazard. Last edited by Thor 2; 7th January 2018 at 02:15 PM.
 7th January 2018, 02:09 PM #202 zooterkin Nitpicking dilettanteDeputy Admin     Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Berkshire, mostly Posts: 41,494 Originally Posted by wobs We sometimes talk about losing a few pounds, but when we weigh ourselves we think in stones. Well, exactly; we choose the unit according to the amount we're measuring. It just feels like there is a unit missing if you don't have stones between pounds and hundredweights. __________________ The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts.Bertrand Russell Zooterkin is correct Darat Nerd! Hokulele Join the JREF Folders ! Team 13232 Ezekiel 23:20
 7th January 2018, 02:14 PM #203 Thor 2 Illuminator     Join Date: May 2016 Location: Brisbane, Aust. Posts: 4,165 Originally Posted by GlennB The Imperial and metric ton(ne)s are very nearly the same. ..... Short or long Imperial tons? __________________ Thinking is a faith hazard.
 7th January 2018, 02:22 PM #204 Trebuchet Penultimate Amazing     Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: The Great Northwet Posts: 18,988 Originally Posted by Thor 2 Short or long Imperial tons? The 2000 hundredweight kind. __________________ Cum catapultae proscribeantur tum soli proscripti catapultas habeant.
 7th January 2018, 02:31 PM #205 Thor 2 Illuminator     Join Date: May 2016 Location: Brisbane, Aust. Posts: 4,165 Originally Posted by Trebuchet The 2000 hundredweight kind. Well there are short and long hundredweights also, (100 and 112 lbs respectively). Non the less that is a ******* big ton at 200,000 or 224,000 lbs! __________________ Thinking is a faith hazard.
 7th January 2018, 02:43 PM #206 GlennB Loggerheaded, earth-vexing fustilarian     Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Arcadia, Greece Posts: 23,809 Originally Posted by Thor 2 Short or long Imperial tons? Originally Posted by Thor 2 Well there are short and long hundredweights also, (100 and 112 lbs respectively). Non the less that is a ******* big ton at 200,000 or 224,000 lbs! Any of the ton/nes is better than saying that the bulldozer weighs 100,000 pounds!! Tonnes are multiples of cars, which we can visualise. __________________ "Even a broken clock is right twice a day. 9/11 truth is a clock with no hands." - Beachnut
 7th January 2018, 02:57 PM #207 GlennB Loggerheaded, earth-vexing fustilarian     Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Arcadia, Greece Posts: 23,809 Originally Posted by JoeBentley And this what I was getting at when I made the (apparently carnal sin level) mere suggestion that there might be an emotional and "perspective" angle to some use of some measurement in some contexts, a statement I wasn't aware was me declaring all out war on the very concept of the Metric system. Little weird specific measurement that just pop in certain situations or an older measuring system still being used in certain situations because it just "feels" right is an interesting phenomenon worthy of looking at. You still order your beer in pints, still measure your horses by hands, your Navy still uses fathoms and nautical miles. I totally agree. I had to think a little when my (European) doctor asked me my weight, which I know in stones and pounds but had to dig in my mind to remember the metric equivalent. But choosing to quote a large weight - that's approximate anyway - in many pounds when there are tons as larger units that convey the information better is my point. I have the equivalent gripe in the metric system, where the size of household items is quoted in millimetres, things like fridges and kitchen cabinets. Those items (afaik) never have fractions of a a centimetre about them, so why 500mm when 50 cm is much easier to visualise? __________________ "Even a broken clock is right twice a day. 9/11 truth is a clock with no hands." - Beachnut Last edited by GlennB; 7th January 2018 at 03:03 PM.
 7th January 2018, 02:58 PM #208 jimbob Uncritical "thinker"     Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: UK Posts: 19,444 Originally Posted by JoeBentley And this what I was getting at when I made the (apparently carnal sin level) mere suggestion that there might be an emotional and "perspective" angle to some use of some measurement in some contexts, a statement I wasn't aware was me declaring all out war on the very concept of the Metric system. Little weird specific measurement that just pop in certain situations or an older measuring system still being used in certain situations because it just "feels" right is an interesting phenomenon worthy of looking at. You still order your beer in pints, still measure your horses by hands, your Navy still uses fathoms and nautical miles. I'd think that a nautical mile makes sense in a marine situation, as it is related to minutes of lattitude. __________________ OECD healthcare spending Expenditure on healthcare http://www.oecd.org/els/health-systems/health-data.htm link is 2015 data (2013 Data below): UK 8.5% of GDP of which 83.3% is public expenditure - 7.1% of GDP is public spending US 16.4% of GDP of which 48.2% is public expenditure - 7.9% of GDP is public spending
 7th January 2018, 03:10 PM #209 Elagabalus Illuminator   Join Date: Dec 2013 Posts: 3,415 Originally Posted by Thor 2 Yes that's a hard one to shake compared to the other metric units being accepted more readily. The unit of weight as kilogram makes so much more sense than the stone. A stone is 14 lb. and a lb. is 16 oz .... yes that makes sense? So how do you describe parts of a stone? Being involved in hydraulics in my working life the cubic inch/gallon thing has always been an irritation. 1 US gallon is 231 cubic inches (1 Imperial gallon 277 cubic inches) and hydraulic pump displacement has traditionally been expressed as GPM at 1200 RPM (1200 RPM being synchronous speed for the most common electric motors in the USA*). Hydraulic cylinders have traditionally been made in imperial sizes and the bulk are still that way today. Therefore one is continually calculating volume flow rates in cubic inches/min and converting to US gallons - a real pain. * Synchronous speed of electric motors is determined by the number of poles and the frequency of the alternating current. That frequency is 60 cycles/sec in the USA but 50 in most of the rest of the World. 1 cycle per second makes a certain sense. The Continental Euros were just upset that they weren't able to shove metric time down every ones throats so they decided to go for the 50 cycle standard- which makes absolutely no sense. Quote: ...AEG built the first European generating facility, its engineers decided to fix the frequency at 50 Hz, because the number 60 did not fit the metric standard unit sequence (1, 2, 5)... This would come back to bite them all in the ass when television stations had to convert cinema movies from the Cinema worldwide standard of 24 fps to 25 fps by speeding up the film. Which is fine if it's overdubbed but native language speakers wonder why all the actors sound funny. Meanwhile, all those countries using 60 Hz can just use the convenient 3:2 pulldown*. Hah!!! *not much of a problem anymore thanks to modern HDTV tech.
 7th January 2018, 04:08 PM #210 quadraginta Becoming Beth     Join Date: May 2009 Location: Central Vale of Humility Posts: 22,588 Originally Posted by GlennB The Imperial and metric ton(ne)s are very nearly the same. There's more than just those two. Quote: So does the 18,000 yard trip to work, yet nobody says that. It's the specific attachment to "lots of pounds" that intrigues me. For proper precision that should be measured in the carefully documented unit "football fields". __________________ "It never does just what I want, but only what I tell it." "A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep." "Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened."
 7th January 2018, 04:14 PM #211 Mikemcc Graduate Poster   Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: UK Posts: 1,748 Went to a pizzeria near me, the size options were 12" and half-metre...
 7th January 2018, 04:19 PM #212 quadraginta Becoming Beth     Join Date: May 2009 Location: Central Vale of Humility Posts: 22,588 Originally Posted by GlennB I have the equivalent gripe in the metric system, where the size of household items is quoted in millimetres, things like fridges and kitchen cabinets. Those items (afaik) never have fractions of a a centimetre about them, so why 500mm when 50 cm is much easier to visualise? I was pretty much teasing you about the 100,000 lb. thing. I don't really disagree, and was serious about the point of such a description was to make something sound bigger. But I don't get the highlighted at all. How much cogitation does it take to shift a decimal point. Isn't that what the metric system is all about? That famous 'ease of use'? 500mm and 50cm visualize exactly the same to me, 'cause I don't see any difference in the two. I don't have to divide by 2,000 (or something else ). I just have to move a decimal point if I want it expressed in the other unit. (Not sure why I would though. At least for visualizing it.) __________________ "It never does just what I want, but only what I tell it." "A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep." "Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened."
 7th January 2018, 04:24 PM #213 quadraginta Becoming Beth     Join Date: May 2009 Location: Central Vale of Humility Posts: 22,588 Originally Posted by Mikemcc Went to a pizzeria near me, the size options were 12" and half-metre... That'sa bigga pizza pie! Yum. Our next size up from 12" is usually 16". I guess 0.4 meters just doesn't sound as impressive. 20" would get their attention, though. (They'd have to order special boxes for take-out, though.) __________________ "It never does just what I want, but only what I tell it." "A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep." "Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened." Last edited by quadraginta; 7th January 2018 at 04:26 PM.
 7th January 2018, 04:33 PM #214 Mikemcc Graduate Poster   Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: UK Posts: 1,748 Originally Posted by quadraginta I was pretty much teasing you about the 100,000 lb. thing. I don't really disagree, and was serious about the point of such a description was to make something sound bigger. But I don't get the highlighted at all. How much cogitation does it take to shift a decimal point. Isn't that what the metric system is all about? That famous 'ease of use'? 500mm and 50cm visualize exactly the same to me, 'cause I don't see any difference in the two. I don't have to divide by 2,000 (or something else ). I just have to move a decimal point if I want it expressed in the other unit. (Not sure why I would though. At least for visualizing it.) With a background in manufacturing of scientific equipment we pretty much always deal in mm (apart from when we deploy the kit to the US!) The thing that really gets me is wire gauges. WTF!? What a bizarrely silly system compared to mm2. Last edited by Mikemcc; 7th January 2018 at 04:40 PM.
 7th January 2018, 04:51 PM #215 Noztradamus Illuminator     Join Date: Jan 2010 Posts: 4,680 Originally Posted by lionking Do you still refer to people's heights in feet and inches? Because I do, and when I ask even young people their height they invariable say 5 ft 10 ins or whatever. I wonder how many criminals have evaded capture over the years because people had been told to look for a 1.73m suspect. __________________ The Australian Family Association's John Morrissey was aghast when he learned Jessica Watson was bidding to become the youngest person to sail round the world alone, unaided and without stopping.
 7th January 2018, 04:54 PM #216 Noztradamus Illuminator     Join Date: Jan 2010 Posts: 4,680 Originally Posted by GlennB What's 'ordinary life' about pounds? Is 154lbs somehow easier to visualise than 70 kilos, or is that larger number of pounds meant to sound impressive? Dunno which would be easier. Eleven Stone is the right figure to grasp. __________________ The Australian Family Association's John Morrissey was aghast when he learned Jessica Watson was bidding to become the youngest person to sail round the world alone, unaided and without stopping.
 7th January 2018, 04:56 PM #217 Senex Philosopher     Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 5,591 Originally Posted by Craig B If that is a reference to WW2 you should be reminded that at that time and for the next several decades the UK was non metric too. That proves my point. We didn't need to puncture any Atlantic Wall to put troops into the UK. The UK even used to run the show once when using non metric. Quote: But perhaps it isn't a reference to WW2. WW1, WW2, Cold War, going to the moon, building an atom bomb, running the show... yadda, yadda Quote: It looks very discourteous, and is hard to understand. Get back to me when the Huns are at your gate. Metric seems to lose wars, sink ocean liners, make supersonic airliners unprofitable, cause a loss of appreciation for your allies... and now a loss of humor. Originally Posted by wobs We built Concorde, which some in NASA claim was a greater acheivement than Apollo missions. I take it back. You haven't lost your sense of humor. (Oops, humour ) Quote: Concorde was built using both metric & imperial. And it seems clear now which system is superior.
 7th January 2018, 04:59 PM #218 ceptimus puzzler   Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 5,610 We had another thread about weird scales where bigger numbers mean a smaller size a while back. Wire gauges, camera apertures, and metric paper sizes were three of the items that came up. Seeing as this is a metric thread I'll recap the paper size one. Metric paper always has a height to width ratio of the square root of two - which makes sense as it's the only shape where when you cut it in half you get two pieces the same shape as the original. A0 paper has an area of one square metre, then each bigger number halves the size - so A4 paper commonly used by computer printers has an area of one sixteenth of a square metre. B.A. fasteners (nuts and bolts) popular with model makers, also have sizes derived from metric - though in a convoluted and arcane way - and again bigger numbers mean a smaller size.
 7th January 2018, 05:40 PM #219 Thor 2 Illuminator     Join Date: May 2016 Location: Brisbane, Aust. Posts: 4,165 Originally Posted by Elagabalus 1 cycle per second makes a certain sense. The Continental Euros were just upset that they weren't able to shove metric time down every ones throats so they decided to go for the 50 cycle standard- which makes absolutely no sense. ........ Oops ..... a slight bo bo there. Not 1 cycle per second but 60 cycles per second therefore 1 cycle in 0.016666666.. seconds or 16.666666 ... milliseconds. Time does go metric when you start dividing the second into smaller bits. __________________ Thinking is a faith hazard.
 7th January 2018, 05:43 PM #220 Pope130 Master Poster     Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Oregon Posts: 2,817 We have, at least, pretty much universally adopted metric for artillery. US Army switched to metric designators for cannon during WW-II, for example the 3" bore was replaced by 76.2. The 75mm gun, and the 155mm Long Tom were metric from the start, as they were based on French designs. Mortars lasted in service much longer, and retained their inch measurements. The Navy kept inch measurements for their large guns much longer, because the earlier pattern large guns remained in use 'til replacement by missile systems. The British held onto the "pounder" designations for cannon, and inches for mortars, until the adoption of the 120mm mortar, and the 105mm tank gun. The designation was based on the weight of a lead ball of the bore diameter. 17lb was a 76.2mm bore, 20lb was an 84mm. The Germans went metric early, but used centimeters, rather than millimeters. The famous "88" was actually designated "8.8cm".
 7th January 2018, 05:52 PM #221 quadraginta Becoming Beth     Join Date: May 2009 Location: Central Vale of Humility Posts: 22,588 Originally Posted by Senex Get back to me when the Huns are at your gate. That's just silly. Nobody bothers with gates anymore. __________________ "It never does just what I want, but only what I tell it." "A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep." "Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened."
 7th January 2018, 06:41 PM #222 Trebuchet Penultimate Amazing     Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: The Great Northwet Posts: 18,988 Originally Posted by Pope130 We have, at least, pretty much universally adopted metric for artillery. US Army switched to metric designators for cannon during WW-II, for example the 3" bore was replaced by 76.2. The 75mm gun, and the 155mm Long Tom were metric from the start... Except the current USN 75mm, made by OTO-Melara, is actually 76.2. Three inches. Oops, NavWeaps shows it as 76mm. Oh, well. __________________ Cum catapultae proscribeantur tum soli proscripti catapultas habeant.
 7th January 2018, 06:42 PM #223 Elagabalus Illuminator   Join Date: Dec 2013 Posts: 3,415 Originally Posted by Thor 2 Oops ..... a slight bo bo there. Not 1 cycle per second but 60 cycles per second therefore 1 cycle in 0.016666666.. seconds or 16.666666 ... milliseconds. Time does go metric when you start dividing the second into smaller bits. Oh, touché! Good catch! However, I would argue that the the problems associated with the 24 fps to 25 fps conversion were due entirely because of a fragrant disregard for base 12 (and its awesomeness).
 7th January 2018, 06:58 PM #224 Elagabalus Illuminator   Join Date: Dec 2013 Posts: 3,415 Originally Posted by Pope130 Working in electronics, small arms, and scale modeling I find I can switch from between metric and Imperial with no difficulty for small things, and work with conventional fractions of an inch, or tenths, hundredths and mills. For anything larger than a foot I still think in feet, yards and miles. For range I keep a few rules for converting to yards from meters or arshins. I've been doing a lot of SI slagging in this thread, but even for me, calling a thousandth of an inch a "mill" is truly beyond the pale.* * A "mill" is a millimetre. It's in the name. And can lead to considerable confusion - some folks across the pond probably thought you were actually talking about millimeters. I fear for your safety, my friend ...
 7th January 2018, 07:01 PM #225 Mikemcc Graduate Poster   Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: UK Posts: 1,748 Originally Posted by Craig B If that is a reference to WW2 you should be reminded that at that time and for the next several decades the UK was non metric too. But perhaps it isn't a reference to WW2. It looks very discourteous, and is hard to understand. Aye, a very good reason that the system is properly called Imperial! I had an argument with one of our colonial engineers calling it Standard. I asked him what was standard when it was only shared by them and two tiny countries? Pointing out the issues with the Mars Climate Orbiter finally shut him up.
 7th January 2018, 07:26 PM #226 quadraginta Becoming Beth     Join Date: May 2009 Location: Central Vale of Humility Posts: 22,588 Originally Posted by Elagabalus I've been doing a lot of SI slagging in this thread, but even for me, calling a thousandth of an inch a "mill" is truly beyond the pale.* * A "mill" is a millimetre. It's in the name. And can lead to considerable confusion - some folks across the pond probably thought you were actually talking about millimeters. I fear for your safety, my friend ... What's in the name is division by a thousand. That is independent of the base unit. __________________ "It never does just what I want, but only what I tell it." "A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep." "Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened."
 7th January 2018, 07:34 PM #227 Norman Alexander Illuminator     Join Date: Nov 2014 Posts: 3,442 Originally Posted by Mikemcc Went to a pizzeria near me, the size options were 12" and half-metre... Must have got their pans from Italy. That would be 30cm and 50cm. __________________ ...our governments are just trying to protect us from terror. In the same way that someone banging a hornets’ nest with a stick is trying to protect us from hornets. Frankie Boyle, Guardian, July 2015
 7th January 2018, 07:36 PM #228 Norman Alexander Illuminator     Join Date: Nov 2014 Posts: 3,442 I sympathise with Americans struggling with the metric system. After all, they have 100 cents in their dollar, a weird arrangement if you ask me. __________________ ...our governments are just trying to protect us from terror. In the same way that someone banging a hornets’ nest with a stick is trying to protect us from hornets. Frankie Boyle, Guardian, July 2015
 7th January 2018, 08:08 PM #229 Trebuchet Penultimate Amazing     Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: The Great Northwet Posts: 18,988 Obviously we need some shillings, guineas, and half-crowns. Oh, and we may as well get rid of our cents, as have our neighbours to the north. __________________ Cum catapultae proscribeantur tum soli proscripti catapultas habeant.
 7th January 2018, 08:10 PM #230 Norman Alexander Illuminator     Join Date: Nov 2014 Posts: 3,442 Originally Posted by Trebuchet Obviously we need some shillings, guineas, and half-crowns. Oh, and we may as well get rid of our cents, as have our neighbours to the north. It's a very old problem you face. __________________ ...our governments are just trying to protect us from terror. In the same way that someone banging a hornets’ nest with a stick is trying to protect us from hornets. Frankie Boyle, Guardian, July 2015
 7th January 2018, 08:32 PM #231 Mikemcc Graduate Poster   Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: UK Posts: 1,748 Originally Posted by Elagabalus I've been doing a lot of SI slagging in this thread, but even for me, calling a thousandth of an inch a "mill" is truly beyond the pale.* * A "mill" is a millimetre. It's in the name. And can lead to considerable confusion - some folks across the pond probably thought you were actually talking about millimeters. I fear for your safety, my friend ... using mills as a length measurement is confusing because there is the mil angular measurement (6400 mils = 360 deg). derived from it's approximation to a milliradian.
 7th January 2018, 08:40 PM #232 Trebuchet Penultimate Amazing     Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: The Great Northwet Posts: 18,988 Grads. Anyone here use grads? __________________ Cum catapultae proscribeantur tum soli proscripti catapultas habeant.
 7th January 2018, 08:52 PM #233 Noztradamus Illuminator     Join Date: Jan 2010 Posts: 4,680 Originally Posted by ddt But I can, because I grew up with the metric system. In the CRT era, a standard TV was 55cm, a big one 66cm. Computer monitors, OTOH, have always been measured in inches over here as well, so "42 cm" would be really confusing, as opposed to 17" . Here the unit for displays has always been the "inch". And a range of 1-99 covers everything from mobile phone screens , through to the biggest TVs __________________ The Australian Family Association's John Morrissey was aghast when he learned Jessica Watson was bidding to become the youngest person to sail round the world alone, unaided and without stopping.
 8th January 2018, 01:41 AM #234 zooterkin Nitpicking dilettanteDeputy Admin     Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Berkshire, mostly Posts: 41,494 Originally Posted by Thor 2 The unit of weight as kilogram makes so much more sense than the stone. A stone is 14 lb. and a lb. is 16 oz .... yes that makes sense? So how do you describe parts of a stone? In pounds and ounces, of course. What else? __________________ The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts.Bertrand Russell Zooterkin is correct Darat Nerd! Hokulele Join the JREF Folders ! Team 13232 Ezekiel 23:20
 8th January 2018, 02:11 AM #235 Craig B Penultimate Amazing   Join Date: May 2011 Posts: 22,535 Originally Posted by Thor 2 Yes that's a hard one to shake compared to the other metric units being accepted more readily. The unit of weight as kilogram makes so much more sense than the stone. A stone is 14 lb. and a lb. is 16 oz .... yes that makes sense? So how do you describe parts of a stone? The same way as you describe fractions of other things. In the fifties and before, potatoes were sold retail by the stone, and my mother would send me go buy a half stone of potatoes, which I knew was seven pounds weight; or for a smaller amount, a quarter stone, or three and a half pounds. But the measure borne in mind by the purchaser was a quarter stone. That's what I would ask for. Perfectly straightforward. The shopkeeper didn't need to worry either because brass weights in stones, halves and quarters were there ready to be placed in one pan of the scales. In such transactions there was no need to know or care how many pounds make a stone. Last edited by Craig B; 8th January 2018 at 02:19 AM.
 8th January 2018, 06:36 AM #236 Senex Philosopher     Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 5,591 Originally Posted by Pope130 We have, at least, pretty much universally adopted metric for artillery. Thank god this commie influence hasn't ruined us yet. Originally Posted by quadraginta That's just silly. Nobody bothers with gates anymore. Yes, Maginot lines fail just as quickly when using metric. Originally Posted by Norman Alexander I sympathise with Americans struggling with the metric system. After all, they have 100 cents in their dollar, a weird arrangement if you ask me. We only have to struggle with success my friend.
 8th January 2018, 09:48 AM #237 Dr. Keith Not a doctor.     Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Texas Posts: 17,479 Originally Posted by Elagabalus I've been doing a lot of SI slagging in this thread, but even for me, calling a thousandth of an inch a "mill" is truly beyond the pale.* * A "mill" is a millimetre. It's in the name. And can lead to considerable confusion - some folks across the pond probably thought you were actually talking about millimeters. I fear for your safety, my friend ... I remember using "kips" in some structural analysis classes in the early 90's. Obviously, these were kilo pounds, because "tons" was just too muddied at this point. __________________ I once proposed a fun ban. Suffering is not a punishment not a fruit of sin, it is a gift of God. He allows us to share in His suffering and to make up for the sins of the world. -Mother Teresa
 8th January 2018, 10:14 AM #238 JoeMorgue Self Employed Remittance Man     Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Florida Posts: 14,673 Originally Posted by Trebuchet Obviously we need some shillings, guineas, and half-crowns. Oh, and we may as well get rid of our cents, as have our neighbours to the north. It takes 1.8 cents to make each penny. It's madness. __________________ "Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset, Se7en "Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal
 8th January 2018, 11:13 AM #239 paulhutch Master Poster   Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Blackstone River Valley, MA Posts: 2,280 Originally Posted by aleCcowaN And that's just the beginning of it. I got the story of the tower in the encyclopaedia Argentina, published in 1971 when I was 8 or 9, and I learnt the real name of the tower from it. So I was draftable when they decided to change the name of the park (not the name of the tower) from "Plaza Britania" (the official name it got in 1914 because of the tower, I've just learnt) to "Plaza Fuerza Aérea Argentina", which became an ordinance one year later or so, by the end of 1983 or beginning of 1984. And there's no contradiction, but simply mistakes, when the WP article says «Tras la Guerra de las Malvinas en 1982, la Torre de los Ingleses fue rebautizada con su nombre original "Torre Monumental", aunque los ciudadanos siguen refiriéndose a ella con el nombre "Torre de los Ingleses".». "Torre de los Ingleses" never was its official name, but it was and it continues to be its popular name. Let's not talk of the mistakes in Wikipedia in any language. There's no hope for it. My participation today is reduced to deleting commercial links or gruesome spelling mistakes. Rather than give even one single source to back up your claim you expect me to believe your memory of something you read 46 years ago over dozens of sites including, official ones from the government, major news organizations (e.g. The Economist) and books published prior to 1930. It seems like you just hate Wikipedia and don't really care about accurate information. I'll repeat, give me a source corroborating for your claim and I'll correct the article. Last edited by paulhutch; 8th January 2018 at 11:42 AM.
 8th January 2018, 11:15 AM #240 Steve Illuminator     Join Date: May 2005 Posts: 4,123 Originally Posted by quadraginta That's just silly. Nobody bothers with gates anymore. Or Huns. __________________ Caption from and old New Yorker cartoon - Why am I shouting? Because I'm wrong!"

International Skeptics Forum

 Bookmarks Digg del.icio.us Google Reddit