The BBC 'Today' programme celebrated Guy Fawkes Day today with an item on new government legislation to restrict the times when certain loud fireworks can be set off and generally to tighten up on fireworks sales.

They paid particular attention to the loudest fireworks.

In their piece, they stated that some of these fireworks were 'over 3 feet high', that some of them 'rose to over 300 feet' [nearly half a Network Rail Stretch Limo] and 'flew at speeds of over 130 miles per hour'.

It's an Imperial, not metric, Britain.

Q.E.D.

(I did spare a thought, though, for all those poor metric-only educated children who would have no idea what 30 feet, 300 feet, and 130 miles an hour meant)

<<<(I did spare a thought, though, for all those poor metric-only educated children who would have no idea what 30 feet, 300 feet, and 130 miles an hour meant)>>>

Do you REALLY believe that children would understand distances like 30ft and 300ft better than the equivalent in metric? If you do then you are completely out of touch with reality.

Try taking a child into a field and ask him/her to go and stand a certain number of feet away from you.

Then do the same giving the distance in metres.

I think that's the point Tony was trying to make.

Children who have received a metric-only education might not be able to estimate 30 ft.

Anyone who refuses to teach children Imperial measures, whether a school teacher or parent, is doing the kids a great disservice.

<<<I think that's the point Tony was trying to make.>>>

I think you are misinterpreting his post. I think he was being sarcastic and actually believes that children understand feet as well as metres.

<<<Anyone who refuses to teach children Imperial measures, whether a school teacher or parent, is doing the kids a great disservice. >>>

I agree with you, and I believe the situation has changed since I was at school (I was never taught any imperial measurements)

I don't see any justification for the BBC using the distance 300ft in this case though, when 100m would be much more appropriate.

"Do you REALLY believe that children would understand distances like 30ft and 300ft better than the equivalent in metric?"

Yes - don't you have any young kids in your family? cousins, sisters etc?

" If you do then you are completely out of touch with reality."

Perhaps Tony is not?

"Try taking a child into a field and ask him/her to go and stand a certain number of feet away from you."

Yes and?

"Then do the same giving the distance in metres. "


Tell you what - you try it.

All though we're all biased here I believe you in particular have convinced yourself that how you see it is 100% with no exception.

You have posted many times on this "if it aint the height of a human being it aint understandable in feet" stuff.

It's simply not the case.

What makes it more daft is that if you can visualise 5ft (eg a short lady) you cannot visualise 10ft, 15ft, 20ft etc.

And if you can visualise 6ft (avg young male) you cannot visualise 12ft, 24ft, 60ft etc!

Strange stuff this.

Hands up, here, who hears something expressed in metres and then triples it to get the right visualisation?

[whispers, while pointing] "one - two -- three -- four -- etc etc"

"I think he was being sarcastic"

Surely not?!

I notice the reporting of a 120dB limit, rather than 'four kangaroos stamping on a passing pensioner' noise level, or whatever the equivalent is.

<<<All though we're all biased here I believe you in particular have convinced yourself that how you see it is 100% with no exception.>>>

No, I never generalise in the way you do. I am saying that I think that the MAJORITY of children would be far more comfortable using metres than they would using feet. PaulEOS agreed, as would most pro-imperial people I am sure.

<<<You have posted many times on this "if it aint the height of a human being it aint understandable in feet" stuff.

It's simply not the case.>>>

I think you will fins that it is very much the case. People use a combination of feet for shorter distances and metres for longer distances. We may all be biased here, but you are certainly the most biased person on this board. In your world you simply don't hear any metric being used at all.

<<<Hands up, here, who hears something expressed in metres and then triples it to get the right visualisation?

[whispers, while pointing] "one - two -- three -- four -- etc etc">>>

and of course no-one does the opposite!

Just keep telling yourself that metric doesn't exist and maybe it will go away.

<<<All though we're all biased here I believe you in particular have convinced yourself that how you see it is 100% with no exception.>>>

"No, I never generalise in the way you do. I am saying that I think that the MAJORITY of children would be far more comfortable using metres than they would using feet. PaulEOS agreed, as would most pro-imperial people I am sure."

From what I gather, PaulEOS has recently returned from the US to the UK - unfortunately people will even believe you if you said that UK speed limits were in km/h under certain circumstances. I would say anyone above the age of 5 would be equally ok with both.

<<<You have posted many times on this "if it aint the height of a human being it aint understandable in feet" stuff.

It's simply not the case.>>>

"I think you will find that it is very much the case. People use a combination of feet for shorter distances and metres for longer distances."

But this is simply not the case! Listen to yoof "radio one" FFS!
You will hardly hear metres in the UK!
Ok I accept that yards get used but for stuff like "fell 200ft" feet really do get used - exclusively.

" We may all be biased here, but you are certainly the most biased person on this board. In your world you simply don't hear any metric being used at all. "

I use metric a lot of the time - so I hardly think I will agree with this!

<<<Hands up, here, who hears something expressed in metres and then triples it to get the right visualisation?

[whispers, while pointing] "one - two -- three -- four -- etc etc">>>

"and of course no-one does the opposite!"

Some people have convinced themselves that all is metric! Even working their speed out in kph from a speedo that show mph!

"Just keep telling yourself that metric doesn't exist and maybe it will go away."


Gave it a go just now.
It didn't work!

Plus when I choose to use metric myself for convenience and metric has -erm- "gone away" then what can I use? Imperial I guess - but for the purpose that I chose metric for that particular time I am denied the choice to use it if I am forced to use imperial.

"millimetres" is a good example - I quite think they're a pretty handy size.

"I would say anyone above the age of 5 would be equally ok with both"

After that I guess that due to parenting, peer pressure and "life" the balance comes towards feet.

For horizontal distances above 3m (10ft), I wreckon people use either metres or yards. As a yard or metre is roughly the same, when someone says 100yds, it can be roughly translated to 100m. My point being that children may use the term "yard" in longer distances aswell as metres because as long as they know that a yard is roughly a metre (picked up from parents using yards), then they may use yards simply because they hear their parents use it. What they are psycologically thinking though is metres.

If someone said to a kid, something is 10 yards away, I am sure they would visualise 10m.

How many people can distinguish 10yd from 10m unless they actually measure it (or as least pace it out)?

OK, maybe I took Tony's post in its literal meaning and that's not what was meant.

Andy: "I am saying that I think that the MAJORITY of children would be far more comfortable using metres than they would using feet. PaulEOS agreed, as would most pro-imperial people I am sure."

Not exactly. I said that children who had been educated solely in metric measures would feel more comfortable with them, just as a child who has been taught to speak only French would naturally feel more comfortable speaking Frewnch than English.

I'm sure that the majority of French or German children would indeed feel more comfortable with metric units, but not necessarily the majority of British children. (And it would most certainly NOT apply to the majority of American children.)

SteveH: "From what I gather, PaulEOS has recently returned from the US to the UK - unfortunately people will even believe you if you said that UK speed limits were in km/h under certain circumstances."

I've been back here since 1996 actually, although I still maintain ties with work and friends.

There are also those people in the U.K. who believe the propaganda that we are the only country left in the world not to have gone completely metric.

Some of them have expressed real surprise, and in a few cases actual disbelief when I've tried to tell them that the U.S. still quite happily uses miles, pounds & ounces, Fahrenheit, etc.

re (Richard): "If someone said to a kid, something is 10 yards away, I am sure they would visualise 10m".


REPLY:

Pull the other one.

Please answer these two questions.

1. How many (million) children under 18 in the United Kingdom have watched at least one football match on TV?

2. How many times in a typical football match does the referee award a free kick where the defenders have to retreat, er, 10 yards?

And how often do we see the referee actually pace out the 10 yards? - and even hand out yellow cards when the defenders don't retreat that far?

And how often are there references to 'the 6-yard box' and '18-yard box', never mind shots from 25 yards, 30 yards etc.?

Now I respectfully invite you to reconsider your statement above.

Pull the other one.

Please answer these two questions.

1. How many (million) children under 18 in the United Kingdom have watched at least one rugby match on TV?

2. How many times in a typical rugby match does the referee award a penalty where the defenders have to retreat, er, 10 metres?

And how often do we see the referee actually pace out the 10 metres? - and even hand out yellow cards when the defenders don't retreat that far?

And how often are there references to 'the 22 metre line' and '5 metre line', never mind shots from "outside the 22".?

Now I respectfully invite you to reconsider your statement above.

Martin and Tony merely prove the point (again) that both are used.

Unfortunately (being Welsh) football is preferred by youngens than rugby.

And besides that - commentators in rugby tend to describe things in imperial unless the obvious happens ("wales going back to their 22" etc).

Now I respectfully invite you to reconsider your statement above in relation to popularity and frequency of the two games.

<<
Now I respectfully invite you to reconsider your statement above in relation to popularity and frequency of the two games.
>>

Our school played rugby, not football.

our school played both.


Are you from the north, perchance?

and....

union or league?

Rugby Union

I just tried to get out of games in any way possible!

I've never been able to see what's the slightest bit interesting about a bunch of guys kicking a ball around a muddy field.

I am pleased to be able to agree with you on something!

There is certainly no reason why PE should be compulsory until Year 11.

I guess everybody has to find some common ground somewhere. :)