Hi,

I am new to this forum and I have been looking the recent messages.

I sense a lot hatred for those nice Imperial measures.

What's wrong with inches, feet yards, miles etc?

God, you've really left yourself open there, mate :D


*puts on tin cap, hides under sink, and waits for the metric brigade to arrive*

Hi Edward,

As you are new to the forum let me introduce myself as one of the "metric brigade".

Speaking for myelf, I don't hate Imperial measures. I learn't them at school and grew up on them, so to speak. I know them well and have used them in the past.

But to me, as I have come to know the metric system, I recognise it as a better alternative. It has many advantages over Imperial, some more significant than others, but before I get into that perhaps you could tell me a bit more about your point of view.

Can you be more specific as to what you mean by 'nice' when refering to the units you mentioned?

Stan,

I guess when I used the word 'nice' I was being defensive on the assumption of harsher feelings than you expressed.

In general, my point of view is that I am happy with Imperial measures. I use them more or less exclusively and I don't have any reason to adopt metric.

Like you I was brought up on Imperial, I know it well and it serves its purpose. I know the basics of metric but I don't use it any more than I have to. To me metric is something that other people use. If I'm given information in metric I usually convert or ask others to do it for me. In fact it has become a nuisance rather than a help to me.

I'm not a stubborn person but I won't take the trouble to change unless I have a complelling reason to do so.

Over to you then Stan, what's so wonderful about metric?

P.S.
Thank's for the civilised response, after Bryan's remarks I was getting ready to take cover :-)

Edward you live in the US? I take it you do since you said metric is something other people use. Long live freedom of choice!

Bryan, you cant hide from the metric brigade. You have to fight and resist them, if noone does then the battle is lost.

erm, what the hell!! I posted a second post i nthis thread before yours Roth, and now it is gone.. in it I said that I should have specifically singled-out Eric, Euric, Metre and xcole.

Edward you live in the US? I take it you do since you said --"metric is something other people use".--- Long live freedom of choice!

metre:
Sounds damn XENOPHOBIC to me.

<<<I sense a lot hatred for those nice Imperial measures.>>>

Amongst the general population the hatred is for the metric measurements, not for imperial - and the main reason for this is purely xenophobic - metric is perceived as being foreign, some even perceive it to be French (which of course increases the hatred further)

It is quite ridiculous what a political issue this has become, and how tabloid 'spin' can make so much out of something so trivial.

Bryan,

Eric and metre are the same person.
"Euric" was given his marching orders months ago by BWMA for his - how shall we say - "style" of posts.

Edward:

The only person posting here now that has the "berserk"/extremist type mentality is "metre" (ie, eric). And he self-admittedly said once that he doesn't even know metric! (having been brought up on imperial and holding the bizzare idea that you cannot know both systems)

As someone who is pro-choice (leaning towards imperial) I actually have grown to like the metric "brigade". Sometimes they can be quite irritiating ;-) but on the whole not a bad bunch to argue with.

And to this extent the "war" like idea is more like a rivalry than anything serious.

For full all out war go to metricsucks.com!

Are you from the UK, Edward?

I am in the UK.

The hatred of Imperial that I sensed was on this forum not the general public. However I can see now that hatred was too strong a word.

If I understand Stan's view it's more a case of trying to promote metric.

Andy, in a word: rubbish. Most people do not dislike metric because they see it as foreign. Complete and utter bonnox.

And Steve: Euric is totally intolerable, I agree- I try debating him at metricsucks, but I swear he has some sort of retardation going on there.

<<<Andy, in a word: rubbish. Most people do not dislike metric because they see it as foreign. Complete and utter bonnox.>>>

The main reasons people prefer imperial to metric in Britain are

a) they are used to it and can't be bothered to change

or

b) they see metrication as something forced upon us by the EU and think sticking with imperial is fighting to keep part of our culture.

What other reason is there to prefer imperial? I doubt if many people think it is a better system.

Bryan:
...admit it though, it *IS* kinda fun poking the stick at him?.

Edward: Just so that you know all the posters here are UKers except for Bud, MattS and Roth who are from murka.

I hope I haven't left anyone out!

The rest are a confusing bunch.

I am the honorary member for Wales.
Most of the rest are from England.
Martin has South African links but lives in the UK.
Conrad is from Belgium (?) but lives in the UK
Eric is from planet gorble-flap
Bryan is a member of the "England is Great" party!
XCole - hmm, lets skip that one.
Tony Bennet is our UKIP representative who likes to collect road signs.
etc etc

And we've all been doing this for YEARS!

(sad but true)

I wonder whether we'll all still be here when we're drawing our pensions.

Ooerr, some people will have (ahem) "moved on" by then I guess. How morbid.

In 2042 the metric bunch will still be telling us that road metrication is inevitable and the sooner we get used to it the better!

Andy, let me add one more to your list above. How about the costs involved in converting?

Heh, but seriously Steve, I am a British nationalist (tho' not BNP!!!), not an English nationalist.

Andy, I prefer Imperial in terms of its usefulness as a system; asides from lack of electrical units, and a rigorous standardisation procedure (whereby "m/s/s" is not preferred), I see English as good as metric. I mean, even the 1 ml = 1CC = 1 g thing is irrelevant, as 1cft = 2000pl = 1000oz (not quite exactly 1000oz, but then the error margin is about the same as metric, as 1CC is not 1 g)

I don't consider myself to be Xenophobic. As a matter of fact I have traveled to Germany, France, the UK, Austria, the Czeck Republic, and the Netherlands before. All by my own accord. So obviously I dont have a hate for foriegners or foriegn ideas. What I am against however, is the compulsory destruction of part of the culture which I live in. I believe in choice, liberty, and freedom. Not tyranny, submissiveness, and subjugation.

Xenophobia June 8 2004, 2:01 AM


I don't consider myself to be Xenophobic. As a matter of fact I have traveled to Germany, France, the UK, Austria, the Czeck Republic, and the Netherlands before. All by my own accord. So obviously I dont have a hate for foriegners or foriegn ideas. What I am against however, is the compulsory destruction of part of the culture which I live in. I believe in choice, liberty, and freedom. Not tyranny, submissiveness, and subjugation.


metre:
Since you have travelled a little, you must have really felt sorry for those cultur less, liberty deprived, and totally submissive metric creatures. It's a sad metric world, I know.

Roth,

I assume from this,

" don't consider myself to be Xenophobic. As a matter of fact I have traveled to Germany, France, the UK, Austria, the Czeck Republic, and the Netherlands before. All by my own accord. So obviously I dont have a hate for foriegners or foriegn ideas. What I am against however, is the compulsory destruction of part of the culture which I live in. I believe in choice, liberty, and freedom. Not tyranny, submissiveness, and subjugation."

that you refer to compulsory metrication, i.e. the requirement by laws or regulation that metric units are used in some areas of British life.

I also take it that you have in mind laws passed as a result UK implementation of EU directives, such as the outlawing of lb oz in the market place.

As far as I am aware, compulsory metrication in the UK has not brought about any fundamentally new laws or regulations. In other words those areas where metric is enforced by regulation were already subject to legal enforcement or regulation, it's just that the choice of allowed units were changed.

As regard EU directives, they are not in themselves laws. They are instructions to governments of member states of the EU. The process of implementing them respects the autonomy of National parliaments and their mandate by National elections. The EU does not have any direct powers over the British electorate.

The powers such as they are in Brussels, only exist as long as member states remain members of the EU. They are nothing more than conditions of membership. No one is holding a gun to our heads forcing us to stay in the EU whether we like it or not. We in the UK still have a democratic right to tell Westminster to pull out if we so wished.

It's worth noting that at the 2001 general election William Hague tried to make the EU an election issue over the prospect of the Euro. The result was that he hardly scratched the surface of Labours huge majority.

I am not declaring my own views on the EU one way or the other here I merely want to point out that compulsory metrication is not the destructive tyranny it is made out to be.

<<<whereby "m/s/s" is not preferred>>>

I wonder where you lifted that from Bryan? ;-)

BTW - I am not going to pass on my confused political leanings or what party I normally support.

But I want to make one appeal.

Whether you are a natural Tory, a socialist, one of those lib-dem types or a BNPer, whether your vote goes to the greens or you prefer a left-winger as your natural representative I appeal to the posters here to LEND their *MEP* vote to the UKIP.

Now - even if you are pro-EU there are benefits to this.

[look of shock fills the theatre followed by a big "how"?]

A good UKIP vote will force all the main parties to have a proper debate about our relationship with the EU. As a sceptic it would allow the Brits proper access to telling the government what they think, as a pro-EU type person it will allow the debate to allay fears that might have been created by the media and pressure groups etc.

Totally off topic, but seeing as Thursday is just 2 days away its wuite topical!

Right.

I've got my flame retarding outfit on.

Off you go.....

>>> The EU does not have any direct powers over the British electorate.

No, but the 1972 European Communities does. Parliament repealed the compulsory metric regulations in 1985 but, if Lord Justice Laws is to be believed, the 1972 Act takes precedence.

I concur, Steve. Although I am a UKIP member, anyway.

<<
Since you have travelled a little, you must have really felt sorry for those cultur less, liberty deprived, and totally submissive metric creatures. It's a sad metric world, I know.
>>
If the government in those countries treated all issues like they treat measurement, it would be a sad world. But since they have trumped personal liberties in a very narrow area, the effect is not so great.

<<
As regard EU directives, they are not in themselves laws. They are instructions to governments of member states of the EU. The process of implementing them respects the autonomy of National parliaments and their mandate by National elections. The EU does not have any direct powers over the British electorate.
>>
But the national government is required to implement them. So the EU does not make laws, but tells the country what laws to make. It is just a technicality. In effect, the EU is making laws.


<<
The powers such as they are in Brussels, only exist as long as member states remain members of the EU. They are nothing more than conditions of membership. No one is holding a gun to our heads forcing us to stay in the EU whether we like it or not. We in the UK still have a democratic right to tell Westminster to pull out if we so wished.
>>
That's exactly what the states in the US believed when they ratified the US constitution. Five decades later, when some of them tried to leave, they couldn't.
As long as there is no clause explicitly stating that countries have the right to leave the EU unilaterally (without the consent of the EU or any other countries), I think it is safe to assume that in a short amount of time the EU's powers will have grown adequately so that they can force countries to stay in.

When I made my last statement I was not refering just to metric but to many other issues as well. Freedom of speech, right to assembly, and the right to bear arms, are just a few examples. As for government it would seem that all governments are tyrannical to some extent or another. But it wont likely get better if people are content with the way things are.

Compulsory Metric June 9 2004, 3:39 AM


When I made my last statement I was not refering just to metric but to many other issues as well. Freedom of speech, right to assembly, and the right to bear arms, are just a few examples. As for government it would seem that all governments are tyrannical to some extent or another.

"But it wont likely get better if people are content with the way things are".


metre:
Wise words, so make a start with the metric system.

Re: Yards are miles better June 9 2004, 1:17 AM


metre:
<<
Since you have travelled a little, you must have really felt sorry for those cultur less, liberty deprived, and totally submissive metric creatures. It's a sad metric world, I know.
>>
Bud:
If the government in those countries treated all issues like they treat measurement, it would be a sad world. But since they have trumped personal liberties in a very narrow area, the effect is not so great.

metre:
Little do you know? Every citizen in metric countries is thankful that his/her government was prepared to inconvinience one generation for the benefit of themselves, and many to come.
Only America's me me me generations put shelfishness ahead of their own children's welfare.

<<
Little do you know? Every citizen in metric countries is thankful that his/her government was prepared to inconvinience one generation for the benefit of themselves, and many to come.
>>

I asked my cousin in India about that one. I asked if she was thankful that the government had required the country to go metric. She initially said yes, but then added that if it hadn't, she would be more familiar with the British system and it would be the same thing. She also said (as I have said earlier) that the main motivation to change was hatred of everything British after independence, not any simplicity issues.

<<<<? Every citizen in metric countries is thankful that his/her government was prepared to inconvinience one generation for the benefit of themselves, and many to come.
>>>>

ROTFL!!!!

We haven't had an ericism for ages now!

Thanks for that little germ ,eric!

LOL! LOL!

(catches breath) "Every citizen" (wipes a tear from his eye)

I wouldn't like to say how people in commonwealth countries feel in retrospect about the introduction and change over to metric.

But I do envy people who live in countries where metric has been the norm for many generations. To them the metre, litre, kilogram etc is as ingrained in their perception of the world as Imperial is to people of my generation in the UK.

It isn't easy making the change such that you get a feel for metric instead of more traditional units. But once you do it is worth it. I speak only from personal experience of course.

For example. I now believe I can make a fair guess as to how much someone weighs in kg if I meet them or see images of them that allow me to guess their height in m.

If anyone wants to know how I will explain.

<<
I now believe I can make a fair guess as to how much someone weighs in kg if I meet them or see images of them that allow me to guess their height in m.
>>

What is the advantage of being able to do that?
I mean, an advantage that you don't get using lbs or ft/in, assuming that the whole country uses that.

Re: Yards are miles better June 9 2004, 6:14 AM


<<
Little do you know? Every citizen in metric countries is thankful that his/her government was prepared to inconvinience one generation for the benefit of themselves, and many to come.
>>

I asked my cousin in India about that one. I asked if she was thankful that the government had required the country to go metric. She initially said yes, but then added that if it hadn't, she would be more familiar with the British system and it would be the same thing. She also said (as I have said earlier) that the main motivation to change was hatred of everything British after independence, not any simplicity issues.

metre:
Ah, that changes everything, who would not bow to the authority of your cousin, my humble apology.

Bud wrote

<<
<<
I now believe I can make a fair guess as to how much someone weighs in kg if I meet them or see images of them that allow me to guess their height in m.
>>

What is the advantage of being able to do that?
>>

If you are health concious, it is easier to calculate your BMI in metric than in Imperial.

Not really. Check out the ARM BMI Index thread from a while ago here.

<<<If you are health concious, it is easier to calculate your BMI in metric than in Imperial>>>

Depends whether you're young enough to know what the internet is, or whether you need a chalk and slate to work it out.

If you need to rely on the Inetrnet when chalk and slate will do, there is something wrong with your approach. remember the KISS principal (Keep It Simple Stupid).

Or get a pair of scales that accurately work it out for you (simple height and weight use is badly inaccurate if, for example, you work out a lot)

<<
...(simple height and weight use is badly inaccurate if, for example, you work out a lot)
>>

That is correct Steve.

In 1998 Dr Margaret Ashwell published an article in the BMJ showing that the ratio of a person's height to waiste measurment is a better indicator of what is called 'intra-abdominal fat', compared to BMI.

In other words excessive fat around the middle.

According to the health profession it isn't just pure fat that is harmful its that which resides around the waist area that does all the damage.

BMI on its own doesn't tell you about the distribution and type of body tissue that is contributing to the excess weight.

There are three cases where a BMI over the normal safe zone (20 - 25) might not be a genuine cause for alarm.

(i) A person with well developed muscles. The excess weight may be because of an abnormal amount of muscle tissue in the upper and lower parts of the body. Then waist will be realtively small but the tummy quite muscely (the six pack).

(ii) A tall person with a large frame where the excess weight is in the bones.

(iii) Someone with a large hip measurement but realively small waiste, (typically female). The fat is around the bum and thighs.

However, having said all that, in most cases excess weight on the BMI scale is usually cause for alarm. The above 3 categories account for a relatively small percentage of the population.

In any case, just looking at someone (or yourself in the mirror) can tell you the difference.

<<
If you are health concious, it is easier to calculate your BMI in metric than in Imperial.
>>

That is because the BMI is defined in terms of metric units (kg/m^2). There is nothing about the BMI that fundamentally has to be done in metric units. In fact, the BMI could be done equally well in any mass and length units you want. The problem here is that the Americans decided to adopt a definition of BMI that other countries use, rather than base it on the units that are used in their own country. This is not a problem with the units, it is a problem with the definition of the value.

Calculations where weight is divided by the square of height is inevitably simpler in a decimal system of measurment.

Non decimal requires additional arithmetic to convert to a single unit for weight and height.

Well, remember that in the medical profession in the US (not sure about UK), weight and height are already only given in one unit (lbs and inches). Since most people are between 5 and 6 feet tall, and 5 ft = 60 in., the conversion is trivial.

Bud wrote

<<
Well, remember that in the medical profession in the US (not sure about UK), weight and height are already only given in one unit (lbs and inches)
>>

In the UK the medical profession is required by law to use metric units for its records.

However *ALL* forms have ft/inches and st/pounds on them, as this is how we speak.

When you discuss with your doctor he'll assume imperial.

One of my friends is a young (very good) doctor and he talks exclusively imperial (obv not for the drugs themselves).

Another reason why EU rules are either stupid or being enforced too rigidly in the UK as everthing will need to be filed away and "forgot" in converted metric!

SteveH wrote

<<
When you discuss with your doctor he'll assume imperial.
>>


But if you examine the scales in their surgery, (or the nurse'e surgery), you will see that they are kg only!

Incorrect.

The new ultra sensitive round ones show both.

"Both"

Would you have an issue with that?

Sorry to dredge this cumbersome one up, but there are some points I wanted to respond to.

Andy said on June 7 2004, 5:16 PM : “What other reason is there to prefer imperial? I doubt if many people think it is a better system.”

Response: What other reason? Pick one. You would do well to keep in mind that ‘better’ is a relative term.

Bud said on June 12 2004, 3:18 AM: “Well, remember that in the medical profession in the US (not sure about UK), weight and height are already only given in one unit (lbs and inches). Since most people are between 5 and 6 feet tall, and 5 ft = 60 in., the conversion is trivial.”

Response: Good guess, but not true. Understandable mistake, though. When the doctor takes your temperature, he tells you the temperature in Fahrenheit; but he records it in Celsius because he is using a dual thermometer. The scales are in pounds and ounces and the measuring stick attached to the scale is in inches and feet. However, when the doctor records this information, he converts it to metric. I found this out entirely by accident one day when I told the nurse my height in centimeters because I just happen to know it off hand. She thanked me – because she wouldn’t have to convert my height to metric. This is a very sensible way to conduct business. Even if you use metric, know how to communicate in units that your customer understands. They will be more comfortable dealing with you and will more likely be repeat customers.

Well, the problem here is that they are using 2 systems. One for records and one to tell the patient. This is not the fault of the imperial system. It would be just as easy to use pounds for both purposes as kilos. In fact, that's what they did before metrication came about. So when you look at it, trying to convert to metric has caused more problems because there are now 2 systems to contend with where there used to be only one.

You're probably right, Bud. One reason for using metric in medicine might be because metric volume and mass is more efficient for measuring drugs. Metricators think that this gives a good excuse to go all metric. It’ll be more efficient, they say. It’s easy to figure out the dosage of medicine in milliliters to give to a man of a certain weight in kilograms, they say. This is true, but it is only a half-truth. Consider the following:

Which is easier:

1.) Figuring out the dosage of medicine to give a 69.01 kg man at 0.642 mL/kg?

or

2.) Figuring out the dosage of medicine to give a 152 lb. man at 0.291 mL/lb?

While a metricator’s brain would probably melt at the thought of mixing metric and customary measures, we customary types don’t really see how this is functionally different from a situation where we used all imperial/ACM, or all metric.

Medical literature, which is read world-wide is in English language and metric units. In addition, in the UK it is a legal requirement that metric untis be used for medical record. That is a good enough reason to encourage the man-in-the-street to use metric units.

Now that’s just plain backward.


Si tacuisses, philosophus mansisses

Sorry, Martin. I just came from the NIST web site and was a little annoyed. That was rude of me, and I apologize.

Re: Yards are miles better September 4 2004, 8:47 AM


Well, the problem here is that they are using 2 systems. One for records and one to tell the patient. This is not the fault of the imperial system. It would be just as easy to use pounds for both purposes as kilos. In fact, that's what they did before metrication came about. So when you look at it, trying to convert to metric has caused more problems because there are now 2 systems to contend with where there used to be only one.

metre:
Who forced US Drs. to go metric? Let me guess, common sense. Had you converted like everybody else, metric would be the predominant measurement language in Yankeeland today. The blame rests entirely with cowardly politicians and people that can't make up their mind.

What's "well there you go then" in latin?