Metric system

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guest
  • Start date Start date
G

Guest

Guest
I just wanted to bring this up: There's been a lot of talk about England entering the metric system lately, and I just want to know... why the hell are they keeping on to the old ridiculous system?

I mean, I saw a TV show here one day. There was this interview with this crazy old Englishman talking about the benefits of the non-metric system. He said something like this: "One pound is 8 stone, there goes 12 stone in one hundredweight, so one hundredweight is effectively two thirds of a sixtieth of a pound. It's that simple and convenient!"

And then the interviewer walked around and asked people how tall they were. "Somewhere around four meters, I think." "Let's see, I'm 6 foot 4, that'd be... around one meter." I mean, at least we metric people have a *clue* to how long a foot is!

(oboy, am I in for a beating)
 
WTF are you talking about? England has used metric for ages only old people who have used imperial all their lives still use it. That show was to put it polite a load of bullshit.
 
>Then why does games workshop use
>inches instead of centimetres?

Because the Warhammer fantasy RPG (and board game) takes place in the "past" and at that time the inch-system was used all over the known world.

[div align=center]

http://www.poseidonet.f2s.com/files/nostupid.gif
[/div]

"Call me a vagabond, and I'll smile. Call me a thief, and I'll laugh. Call me a liar, and I feed you your liver."
 
Yeah

[font size=1" color="#FF0000]LAST EDITED ON Dec-12-00 AT 08:28PM (GMT)[p]And i guess an inch back then was about 2 metres or so. And in the warhammer 40.000 universe to.
 
How can you then say that GB has gone over to the metric system? They will obviously use the system most people are familiar with, and have rulers for at home.
 
>I just wanted to bring this
>up: There's been a lot
>of talk about England entering
>the metric system lately, and
>I just want to know...
>why the hell are they
>keeping on to the old
>ridiculous system?
>
>I mean, I saw a TV
>show here one day. There
>was this interview with this
>crazy old Englishman talking about
>the benefits of the non-metric
>system. He said something like
>this: "One pound is 8
>stone, there goes 12 stone
>in one hundredweight, so one
>hundredweight is effectively two thirds
>of a sixtieth of a
>pound. It's that simple and
>convenient!"
>
>And then the interviewer walked around
>and asked people how tall
>they were. "Somewhere around four
>meters, I think." "Let's see,
>I'm 6 foot 4, that'd
>be... around one meter." I
>mean, at least we metric
>people have a *clue* to
>how long a foot is!

How about a "slug" as a measure of mass?

I thought most of Europe *was* using the metric system and that really only the USA was lagging behind (despite an initiative in the 1970s).

Strange.

-Xotor-

[div align=center]

http://www.poseidonet.f2s.com/files/nostupid.gif
[/div]
 
We _are_ using the metric system!!!!!! Damn those stupid TV producers making uninformed idiotic bullshit programs.
 
[font size=1" color="#FF0000]LAST EDITED ON Dec-13-00 AT 08:14AM (GMT)[p]For gods sake I am English!!!!! I should know what system we use. That show was _lying_. They pulled out some old guy to make it look like we all used the old imperial system _most_ people (about 90%) use metric.
 
Yes, but isn't the imperial system still the official system? I know that the kids learn metric in school, but it's not a very long time since you began the change is it? (Okay, I'm pulling that out of my ass, but it seems likely)
 
*sigh* Enough OK? All shops _have_ to use metric now its the law and it's been like that for several years. The monetary system changed to metric in the 1970's.
 
>Yes, but isn't the imperial system
>still the official
>system? I know that the
>kids learn metric in school,
>but it's not a very
>long time since you began
>the change is it? (Okay,
>I'm pulling that out of
>my ass, but it seems
>likely)

I think England *had* to adopt the metric system in 1965 to be added to some sort of European organization.. I can't remember which.

-Xotor-

[div align=center]

http://www.poseidonet.f2s.com/files/nostupid.gif
[/div]
 
I was under the impression that the U.K. had been on metric for quite some time, official or not. After all, how many governments truly represent their people? Even if it isn't
the official system, GB is still using it.

And why the hell can't we use it here in the states? Considering the vapid stupidity of many of my fellow students, I would think that we would want a system with easier conversions... I guess that there's too much of an adherence to the myth of the great, trailblazing American way to see through to the stagnation that our country is undergoing.

Oops, I seem to have gone off on a bit of a political rant :P

Well, the fact remains that the people of GB are using metric.

-Yamu

KNEEL BEFORE MY AWESOME POWER, MORTAL! Please? Pretty please?
 
Stagnation? No.

>And why the hell can't we
>use it here in the
>states? Considering the vapid stupidity
>of many of my fellow
>students, I would think that
>we would want a system
>with easier conversions... I
>guess that there's too much
>of an adherence to the
>myth of the great, trailblazing
>American way to see through
>to the stagnation that our
>country is undergoing.

I wouldn't call it stagnation, but rather it just isn't in demand. A mile is simply an arbitrary length for an American, as is a foot and a yard. Unless you're adamant about knowing how many feet are between two distances, you're not really going to care about the odd 5280 feet to a mile conversion. The metric system is for scientists and industry, where precise amounts are needed and amounts need to be numerated for precision.

Just because our road-signs haven't changed doesn't mean the metric system isn't in use. The common citizen doesn't really care if it is scientifically incorrect to use a gallon rather than a liter, or a pound instead of a newton (or kilogram). A gallon is simply an arbitrary amount and can be divided into quarts, pints and cups which are easy amounts to remember, and are better suited to tasks like cooking. A half a cup is easier to visualize than 340 ml or some other numerized amount. You buy a *gallon* of gasoline. When it comes to miles and speeds, you merely divide the number of miles by the speed limit, what that distance actually is is abstracted.

Farenheit is eaiser to relate to real-life terms when it comes to high climate temperatures (over 100 degrees is a hot day), but is a pain to have to deal with then dealing with freezing temperature. Farenheit is part of both worlds, annoying at one location and identifiable at another.

-Xotor-

[div align=center]

http://www.poseidonet.f2s.com/files/nostupid.gif
[/div]
 
RE: Stagnation? No.

[font size=1" color="#FF0000]LAST EDITED ON Dec-15-00 AT 03:13PM (GMT)[p]This reminds me of something else that crazy old man said:

"An ounce you can hang by your finger. A pound you can hold in your hand. A stone you can hold under your arm. A hundredweight you can hang by your shoulder, and a ton is what a horse can pull in a carriage."

My point is that it isn't accurate enough. There's much more a horse can pull in a carriage than an exact ton. Sure, "half a cup" is easy and convenient to remember, approximately , but it's simply not as accurate as 340 ml. And you want most accuracy when you cook.

And who has said that the metric system can't be as easily visualized? If you asked a metric person how much 250 ml was, I'm sure he'd pour out a pretty acccurate amount of fluid. 250 ml isn't any harder to remember than your quart. Or half a liter - one pint. We have visualizationable measures, it's just that it's better if you can divide one measurement into smaller measurements without doing complex maths.

And the Fahrenheit scale is the same matter as the imperial system- it's inobvious. Of course, you Fahrenheit people think of it as normal and use it like we use the Celsius scale, but in fact I think it's a pretty stupid way of depicting temperature. Instead of taking basis in a (relatively) permanent temperature like the freezing and boiling point of water, you use something as variable as human body temperature. So for you, it makes it hard to tell when it's freezing, like you said. In Celsius we just have the rule that below 0 is frost and snow, you know.

And you say Fahrenheit is easier to relate to high climate? Tell me how.
 
RE: Stagnation? No.

>The fahrenheit scale is non-linear, right

No, it's perfectly linear. It just has a different sized degree unit and different starting place for zero and 100. If I remember right, you subtract 40, multiply by 9/5 and then add 40 to convert to Celcius, I can't remember if that's the right way..

-Xotor-

[div align=center]

http://www.poseidonet.f2s.com/files/nostupid.gif
[/div]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top