BWMA QUOTE:
"
BRITAIN'S DISASTEROUS EXPERIENCE OF METRIC

Britain knows all about compulsory metric conversion. Since 2000, metric measures have been made compulsory by the European Commission. In 2001, trader Steven Thoburn was dubbed the "Metric Martyr" after being convicted and fined for selling bananas in pounds and ounces.
"


Erm... Disastrous experience? What's so disastrous about it? The fact that some guy was stupid enough to break the law did not affect me in any way. And to be honest, if I want a pound of bananas, I'll buy a pound of bananas, and it'll be sold to me in kilos. So I'll get 0.45kg. And if I want a kilo of bananas, I'll buy a kilo of bananas, and I'll get 1kg. Big BLOODY DEAL!! If you don't understand metric, there's been double labelling for God knows how many decades, so you should have learnt it by now. If you don't like using metric, ask for things in pounds - it really doesn't matter. You'll get the equivalent in kilos. I don't see any disaster happening. Only frustration that the whole conversion is taking so bloody long.

It is not very clever blowing things out of proportion. You want imperial, use imperial. But at least get used to metric units if you come across a product that's not dually labelled. Instead of fighting it, I suggest encouraging people to get used to metric because whatever you do, it's here to stay. I suppose a similar thing could be said for imperial, and believe me, I'm working on it.

Disasterous when you think "civil liberties"

Disasterous when you think "democracy did this?"

I suggest you calm down and ask mum for some orange squash

Well it happens all the time. We don't live in a democracy so get used to it.

And a disaster seems to be a little OTT.

"We don't live in a democracy so get used to it."

Shocking, but probably true!

Would you care to respond?

That event doesn't warrant being labelled as a "disastrous experience." Such language is overly inflamed and is more reminiscent of an angry forum user than of an association that stands for the protection of traditional units of measurement. Please present your case more objectively. You won't convert me, but you'll be more respectable.

...Still waiting

Silence speaks volumes

I didn't word my argument that well, but someone else did, and managed to crush your illusions of martyrdom while they were at it. I'm still waiting for a response, but I'm not going to get it, am I?

Disaster
February 5 2004 at 9:55 AM John


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

BWMA QUOTE:
"
BRITAIN'S DISASTEROUS EXPERIENCE OF METRIC

Britain knows all about compulsory metric conversion. Since 2000, metric measures have been made compulsory by the European Commission. In 2001, trader Steven Thoburn was dubbed the "Metric Martyr" after being convicted and fined for selling bananas in pounds and ounces.
"


Erm... Disastrous experience? What's so disastrous about it? The fact that some guy was stupid enough to break the law did not affect me in any way. And to be honest, if I want a pound of bananas, I'll buy a pound of bananas, and it'll be sold to me in kilos. So I'll get 0.45kg. And if I want a kilo of bananas, I'll buy a kilo of bananas, and I'll get 1kg. Big BLOODY DEAL!! If you don't understand metric, there's been double labelling for God knows how many decades, so you should have learnt it by now. If you don't like using metric, ask for things in pounds - it really doesn't matter. You'll get the equivalent in kilos. I don't see any disaster happening. Only frustration that the whole conversion is taking so bloody long.


His assertion that compulsory metrication was forced onto Britain by the EC has been blown out of the water ages ago. The British parliament passed that law and no one else. As I said earlier defending an outdated and useless measuring system logigally is virtually impossible. So the next best thing is to appeal to emotions, hoping to succeed were logic failed.

John quoted BWMA as saying

<<
In 2001, trader Steven Thoburn was dubbed the "Metric Martyr" after being convicted and fined for selling bananas in pounds and ounces.
>>

Steven Thoburn was not convicted for selling bananas in pounds and ounces. He was cvonvicted for using a set of scales that were not approved for trade. I have a set of scales that displays both metric and imperial units that is not approved for trade as do most readers of this tread. They live in my bathroom. There is probably a lable on my scales and probably on most bathroom scales that are used the UK that says "Not approved for trade".

Shortly before Christmas ther was a French Market in our town. I noticed that the scales were positioned (in what appears to be French Law) such that the buyer could not only see the scales but also the certificates that had been issued by the French local authorities certifyuing the scales as being fit for trade.

<<<By your reckoning, I should feel my civil liberties have been affected if I request to be served in old russian units and am told I can't because they are not legal>>>

How worn-out an argument is this?

Do 80% of the UK work with and prefer Russian units?

Did you ask your MP to fight for metrication (and forget rising crime, asylum problems, sleaze etc)?

>Did you ask your MP to fight for metrication (and forget rising crime, asylum problems, sleaze etc)?

Why is the BWMA asking to fight for imperial measures, and forgets rising crime etc...?

Isn't the BWMA's campaign, might I add fundraising campaign, to take some pointless case to a European Court a completely counterproductive and inefficient use of their time? Why don't they HELP people use metric measures, rather than keep fighting a war that was lost many years ago. Everytime they win one little battle, they use it to blind themselves from the underlying futility of their cause.

No, I don't ask my MP to fight for metrication. I don't have to. It's happening right now. There's always been crime, and my MP can look at the statistics for themselves. Alas, I don't care about asylum problems.

"Why is the BWMA asking to fight for imperial measures, and forgets rising crime etc...?!

"British Weights and Measurements Association"

You need to ask crimestoppers, police associations, community watch organisations this question if they ever stop fighting crime and start arguing about the merits of imperial over metric.

What a bizarre argument!

SteveH
"
What a bizarre argument!
"

Isn't it funny that when I reword -your- original argument against -you- to show you how stupid it was in the first place, you immediately realise what a "bizarre argument" your argument really was

Oh God no!

We've got that old poster again - now posting as Euric and John.

I thought the original post sounded familiar.

Get ready for some stuff about "See, he needs to have the last word" and stuff like that.

I get this awful feeling things are going to get quite boring around here....

It is interesting that you should note this, as I pointed out before that.....


The ***TRUE*** metric system where the time unit is equal to a decimal fraction of a day (0.864secs) and gravity accelerates at 10 metres per time unit squared (and the kilogramme is unit to the mass of a cubic decimetre of water at maximum density) yields the following sized units:


New Metre: 28.82" [Russian length unit "arshin" was 28 engliush inches]
New Kilogramme: 13.83876oz [Russian "funte" was about 14oz]





Interesting, don't you think?

Be quiet, man. what I said is relevant. How can metric be metric truly when the time unit is 1/86,400 days?????????????????????????

Mate, it really is this simple:


The second has that current definition because that makes it as close to the fraction of the day which the second is (1/86,400 i.e 60 sec = 1 min, 60 min = 1 hr, 24hr = 1dy). In other words, the second is that defintion becasue it is 1/86,400 days.


Thus, I am right. If you want metric to have a decimal time unit, to have gravity acclerate at 10 metres per second squared, and for the kilogramme to be equivelant to the mass of water occupying a cubic decimetre, then you must have the system I touched upon above.

Robespierre the "canadian" said this:
"are you retarded or what"
"imperialists are unaware "
"people chose to call imperial FFU"
"Just because you live in the past"
"It is amazing how dumb some people really are"
"hard wooden stick applied to the head "


Stick to one post-name, "euric", believe me it doesn't make metric look any more popular posting as differeint people!

"If you want metric to have a decimal time unit, to have gravity acclerate at 10 metres per second squared, and for the kilogramme to be equivelant to the mass of water occupying a cubic decimetre, then you must have the system I touched upon above."

The kilogramme IS equivelant to the mass of water occupying a cubic decimetre, or litre!

Erm, right. Evil Engineer, I suggest you re-read my last few posts in this thread.

Under the current SI system the following is true:

The MASS of 1dm^3 of water is 1kg.

The WEIGHT of 1dm^3 of water is 9.81N (ie. 1kg multiplied by 9.81m/s^2).

What have I missed ?

<<
The MASS of 1dm^3 of water is 1kg.
>>

Remember that this is not true by definition. The kilogram is defined as the mass of a certain tangible object, not in terms of water.

The second is not decimal. It is based off a fraction of the Earth, namely 1/86,400. If you were to use the "metric" second of 1/100,000 days, and remain true to the metric ideal that gravity accelerates at 10m/s/s, then you MUST have a length unit equal to 28.82". Also, the new mass unit would be as I stated.


If you think the undecimal, bothced g job of metric SI is cool, then why is the same not true for English? You are a fool and a hypocrit with no sense of anything.

Respectfully, you are wrong. If the second has nothign to do with 1/86,400 days then it is a completely arbitrary and stupid unit. Why not just have 1 thousand million ticks of the caesium dah as the time unit, in which case? That would be far more scientific, right? Personally, I think g is immensly important (hence why metricbrains PRETEND g = 10m/s/s i nmetric).


I am right. You are wrong. The end.

Assuming that most people who do measurements are on the surface of the earth, g is a lot more important that the speed of light.

Bud wrote

<<
Assuming that most people who do measurements are on the surface of the earth, g is a lot more important that the speed of light.
>>

By this I assume that you are suggesting that "g" be part of the standrd. But which location's value of "g" should be taken as being "standard". It varies across the surface of the earth - 9.83m/s^2 at the North Pole and 9.78m/s^2 at the Equator - a variation of 0.5%!

I am not saying that g be used as the standard. I am saying that g could be a round number. The amount of time that light takes to travel one meter is arbitrary, so why not select it such that g is a round number?

Bud wrote

<<
I am not saying that g be used as the standard. I am saying that g could be a round number.
>>

Since there is a 0.5% variation in g across the globe, at which poitn should it be a round number? If we go to great lengths to make it a round number at Greenwich, how would we expect to recieve any support from Washington let alone Paris?

OK let me clarify. I wasn't saying that we should change any units of measurement at this point in time. I guess all I was saying was that it would have made more sense if they had set the meter and second this way to begin with.

If you cannot see the practicality of my proposals, people, then there is something seriously wrong with you. Icannot elaborate as I am business, but trust me.

Perhaps Bryan meant "busy"?

P.S. Where's Euric gone?

BWMA, please help. All day I have heard and read about how obese we Brits are now becoming. I am sure it is to do with people not understanding all this metric stuff.
However BBC recommends we learn our BMI and gives the formula in metric only.
Please can you demonstrate the remarkably simple and superior way in which this can be done in imperial for us all to see and use.
My doctor only had metric scales and tape when I was last there, but it did say something weird about-
1.70 metres
68 kg
Look forward to learning how to do this in the way we all understand.

No problem - you must have gone to the BBC site and accidentally clicked on the metric word in the text instead of staying on the default of imperial. These things can be done, I guess - if you are very unsure of how to use a mouse.

Just go here:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/health/yourweight/bmi.shtml

That's the default.

You can enter the stuff in in imperial.

Be careful not to search out for the metric button though - as it will be in there somewhere.

LOL!

Hey

[titter]

perhaps you went up into that space where you put the web address in and accidentally typed the word "metric" into it..

[guffaw]

like this:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/health/yourweight/bmi_metric.shtml

[giggle]

instead of the default of this:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/health/yourweight/bmi.shtml

ROTFL!!!!

LOL!!!

LOL!!!

Euric - what's it like to have a shotgun wound in your foot?

LOL!!!

I'm still chuckling over this one!

Annonymous wrote

<<
My doctor only had metric scales and tape when I was last there, but it did say something weird about-
1.70 metres
68 kg
>>


Alternatively learn the metric system - all tape measures and bathroom scales are dual-units. Also it is a lot easier to calculate your BMI if you know your weight in metric than if you know it in Imperial. (You only need a calculator for metric, you need a calculator, pencil and paper or a computer for Imperial).

I'm sorry mate - I'm still sniggering over this!

Word of advice though, to think that the average UKer uses metric to weigh himself/herself or work out their height in metric is dreaming to say the least.

The website defaults to imperial.

So does every other UK based site that I've used.

But - if it means anything - thanks for cheering my day up yesterday, it was otherwise a very boring day.

Ta

[chuckle]

So it looks like my simple request for how this can be done in the "superior" imperial system cannot be answered by Questions to Bwma. I concede that metric is far more sensible and easier to use. thank you metric folk for your help.

BMI in the imperial system would simply be in units of lbs/in^2 rather than kg/m^2. A constant conversion factor could convert between the two.
Very simple.

Bud,

That is possible, but why have two measures for obesity when we can make do with one?

<<So it looks like my simple request for how this can be done in the "superior" imperial system>>

Do some people here still believe that a measuring system can be "superior" to another one?

I thought we'd left that one behind, along with "metric time" and Pounds/shilling/pence

Look Mr Steve, I just asked a simple question. This is BRITSH weigths and measures and I am sure you must be in suport of these measures because they work better for us and we only can understand them, being Britsh 'n all. Now, the BMI is really easy to do in that awful metric stuff, in fact it takes only a moment. Why is there no formula to do this in the easy and beautiful imperial system? oh well, forget it. Here's another one bugging me and hope BWMA can advise me.
My doctor has prescribed medication for my baby. It says on bottle to give " 5 mL per kg of baby's weight". Ok, my baby ( at last weigh-in) was 9 kg. So I know that 5 mL x 9 kg is the 45 mL I give baby. Is there some way I can make all this beautiful and easy imperial so I can understand it better? What can I call the 5 mL and can I get an imperial label from somewhere? How do I get doctors to stop saying things like " 5 mL per kilo"? I am sure this is harming my baby and it won't get well with this metric medicine.
Please advise me soon bwma.

1) I use a "computer" to work out my BMI - in fact I use a webpage operated by the BBC which I was tempted to go to by someone laughably suggesting that the BBC only had a metric version! :)

2) Metric medicine will not harm your baby (if you actually have one) - unless, of course, you get the decimal point in the wrong place (which is fairly easy to do, I guess) so be careful with your points.

I've not got a baby yet and thus I've not come across this problem (to the extent where I don't even know if you're making this up!). However I am 13 stone [cough cough] pounds and the last time I was prescribed medicine I did not have to flick the little switch to "foreign" on my digi-scales!

BTW - you humour me!

I sensed a glimmer of recognition in that anon. post.

BMI February 16 2004, 5:32 AM
Anonymous:
Look Mr Steve, I just asked a simple question. This is BRITSH weigths and measures and I am sure you must be in suport of these measures because they work better for us and we only can understand them, being Britsh 'n all. Now, the BMI is really easy to do in that awful metric stuff, in fact it takes only a moment. Why is there no formula to do this in the easy and beautiful imperial system? oh well, forget it. Here's another one bugging me and hope BWMA can advise me.
My doctor has prescribed medication for my baby. It says on bottle to give " 5 mL per kg of baby's weight". Ok, my baby ( at last weigh-in) was 9 kg. So I know that 5 mL x 9 kg is the 45 mL I give baby. Is there some way I can make all this beautiful and easy imperial so I can understand it better? What can I call the 5 mL and can I get an imperial label from somewhere? How do I get doctors to stop saying things like " 5 mL per kilo"? I am sure this is harming my baby and it won't get well with this metric medicine.
Please advise me soon bwma.

Very convincingly put, but not for those guys. They live in a imperial dream world that never existed.

Martin, the advantage to having a BMI in imperial would be that people who live in countries where height and weight are measured in imperial units (which includes many countries that are otherwise metric) would be able to calculate their BMI more easily. Of course, you can lump all the conversion factors into one, which is what Americans do.

Anonymous, that last post convinces me that metric works. That's all. It says nothing about the connection between imperial and metric, or anything about imperial at all, for that matter.

Bud,

I know of exactly two countries where height *and" weight are both mesured in Imperial units - the UK and the US. While it is true that heights are unoffically measured in feet and inches in a few Commonwealth countries, all the Commonwealth countries apart from the UK use kg for weights. (Note - the medical profession always uses cm and kg).


BTW, I saw the chiropodist yesterday. There was a notice in her room -

"Please advise me if you are over 135kg (20stone) as that is the maximum weight the chair's motor can accomodate".

Bud, would that notice mean anything to you as I understand that Americans do not use either stones or kg for weights.

<<all the Commonwealth countries apart from the UK use kg for weights>>

Are you speaking on behalf of the carribean there?

Maybe not the Carribean (I have no first-hand knowledge), but certainly for South Africa and Australia.

<<
Bud, would that notice mean anything to you as I understand that Americans do not use either stones or kg for weights.
>>

Most Americans are at least vaguely aware that 1 kg is approximately 2 lbs, especially those who travel.

Re: Disaster February 17 2004, 4:56 AM

Maybe not the Carribean (I have no first-hand knowledge), but certainly for South Africa and Australia.

You can add Papua New Guinea, New Zealand, Fiji, Tonga,
Solomon Islands and maybe some other smaller ones

"You can add Papua New Guinea, New Zealand, Fiji, Tonga,
Solomon Islands and maybe some other smaller ones"

Eric is hoping that none of us have gone to any of those countries - evidentally this will make him "right" !!

LOL!

OK, I will use metric for medication and baby-weighing as this certainly seems safer and very easy for me to use, also metric for BMI as it can be so easily done in cm/kg. But what I am now finding difficult in my desire to only use imperial and remain forever in my imperial world is THE POST OFFICE. Now, this is our ROYAL mail, Royal should therefore be Imperial shouldn't it? Can you imagine if the Queen finds out her face is on a stamp on a package with KILOS written on it for the weight? What can we do here with BWMA to stop this? Can we write over the weight in ounces ( or tiny parts of ounces for letters under 60 g etc and write the weight in lbs/oz over parcels? This must be stopped now. NOBODY understands it and we don't even have lb/oz scales in the Post Office. Can BWMA put them all in please? For God's sake, old ladies are in
there trying to send packages. We must help. I am writing to the emdia about this. Can I quote BWMA supports this?

Euric - you are embarrasing your side again as you increasingly look a fool.

Let's take your post apart shall we?

<<OK, I will use metric for medication and baby-weighing>>

What about if you don't have a baby? I mean - *DO* you have a baby? In the UK almost all people know there baby's weight in lb/oz. I wonder to myself, are they *all* collectively wrong to do such a silly thing?

<< as this certainly seems safer and very easy for me to use>>

In your opinion

<<also metric for BMI as it can be so easily done in cm/kg.>>

S'up to you - most will use imperial, if you want to use metric that's fine. I'm not sure of your point here - are you saying that because you might choose metric that everyone else should? Or already does? MAy I point you back to your biggest blunder of accidentally saying that the BBC had their default BMI site in metric?!?! I'm still grinning about that mistake, btw!

<< But what I am now finding difficult in my desire to only use imperial and remain forever in my imperial world>>

You need to make your mind up. You say that you can only use metric, yet then change to having "a desire" to use imperial! To be honest you'll be better of in imperial in the UK but there is nothing wrong with knowing metric too.

<<<this is our ROYAL mail, Royal should therefore be Imperial shouldn't it?>>

Why? Are you suggesting that the Queen is still head of the empire? Yes, she got those coins made to imperial spec (the collectors stuff) but why equate imperial with a Queen who is not of empire? You sound terribly confused for someone who know everything *and* nothing about this UK that you have not visited ever! LOL!

<< Can you imagine if the Queen finds out her face is on a stamp on a package with KILOS written on it for the weight?>>

I suspect - only "suspect" mind you - that she may have more important things to do than look at boxes in sorting offices!!!! LOL!!

<< What can we do here with BWMA to stop this?>>

Errrrr, nothing? When is the last time someone weighed a letter before sending it?

<< Can we write over the weight in ounces ( or tiny parts of ounces for letters under 60 g etc and write the weight in lbs/oz over parcels?>>>

This is entirely up to you - I would not bother personally as most of us don't class ourselves as "pathetic" like yourself.

<< This must be stopped now.>>

When? What NOW? Oh heck! Wait there then!!

<< NOBODY understands it and we don't even have lb/oz scales in the Post Office.>>

Sorry - NOBODY actually cares how much our letters and parcels weigh - since we buy our postage in "stamps"

<< Can BWMA put them all in please? For God's sake, old ladies are in there trying to send packages.>>

Nice bit of the usual "age hatred" there!
BTW: Do you *honestly* expect a response from BWMA? Normal metric people get responses from BWMA - however nutbags will just get the usual mickey-take - do you get my drift?

<< We must help. I am writing to the emdia about this. Can I quote BWMA supports this?>>

Tell the emdia that we will give you as much support as is needed - I for one will put some money in the charity box for that special hospital to yearn to live in.

SteveH wrote

<<Why? Are you suggesting that the Queen is still head of the empire? Yes, she got those coins made to imperial spec (the collectors stuff)
... >>

£2 coin - weight 12g, diam 28.40mm
£1 coin - weight 9.5, diam 22.50mm
50p coin - weight 8g, diam 27.30mm
20p coin - weight 5g, diam 21.40mm
10p coin - weight 6.50g, diam 24.50mm
5p coin - weight 3.25g, diam 18.00mm

These figures all look as though they are metric-based rather than Imperial based.

http://www.royalmint.com/talk/specifications.asp
<<
Errrrr, nothing? When is the last time someone weighed a letter before sending it?
>>

I do, quite regularly - especially at Christmas time when I have a large number of Christmas cards ot send to many parts of the globe.

<<<<<<Why? Are you suggesting that the Queen is still head of the empire? Yes, she got those coins made to imperial spec (the collectors stuff)
...

£2 coin - weight 12g, diam 28.40mm
£1 coin - weight 9.5, diam 22.50mm

>>>

You know what I'm referring to here, maartin.

As for the other bit - I'd wager that over 99% of people who send stuff in the post don't weigh what they're sending

SteveH wrote

<<
As for the other bit - I'd wager that over 99% of people who send stuff in the post don't weigh what they're sending
>>

Steve - go to the Post Office any day of the week - you will see people weighing packages all day long.

<<
As for the other bit - I'd wager that over 99% of people who send stuff in the post don't weigh what they're sending
>>

"Steve - go to the Post Office any day of the week - you will see people weighing packages all day long."

I still would wager that most things posted are envelopes - that don't get weighed. Go and stand by one of those red things with E"R on them if you don't believe me.

Also - are you honestly saying that when people put a box on the scale in the P.O. that they make a song and dance out of what the figure says on the weight bit? Or do you think they just purchase stamps to the correct value.

Sometimes you make me chuckle, martin - in a different way to the rotfl I reserve for the likes of euric and eric/metre you understand!!

<<
I still would wager that most things posted are envelopes - that don't get weighed. Go and stand by one of those red things with E"R on them if you don't believe me.
>>

If you sell things on sites like Ebay, where large packages may have to be sent, it is highly likely that you will need to weigh the package to work out the price.

See http://www.postoffice.co.uk/portal/po/content1?mediaId=400288&catId=5000002 and this shows the prices for different weight ranges.

In homebase they have trollies with the words "babies no heavier than 9kgs"- what on earth is this gobblegook???

In Tesco they use non-foreign measures for the baby weight on trolleys

Considering hardly anyone measures their baby in metric perhaps BWMA should kindly ask Homebase why they chose this bizzare decision?

Indeed, someone needs to sort this out. BTW, even though DIY is nominally metrical, you can see most of the products in English or dual labelled at Homebase (e.g 12'x12' blanketry sub-marked as 3.6x3.6m, hexagon sets in Imperial etc.)

>>In Tesco they use non-foreign measures for the baby weight on trolleys >>



I'm not sure what you mean by foreign vs. non-foreign. Since imperial units were not of British origin and were imported into Britain, that would make them foreign.

Since SI in truely international and transcends all languages and cultures, it can not be considered foreign anywhere in the world.

So what you are telling us is that Tesco uses kilograms in its descriptions, just as it uses kilograms on all its in store scales to determine pricing and final sale costs.

Thanks for the update.

Strictly speaking, "Imperial" is British. Technically though, most everything is "foreign" as it has its roots or basis elsewhere in the world. Why, as an Anglo-Saxon I myself am even foreign. Come on, get real man. Go back far enough and most of us are citizens of the Great Rift valley.

The fact is SI is "foreign" in as much as it has no real connectio nto Weights and measures evolved in this country.

<<I'm not sure what you mean by foreign vs. non-foreign. Since imperial units were not of British origin and were imported into Britain, that would make them foreign.>>

Sorry, remind me, how far do you want to go back? Did Adam use imperial? Where did he live?

lol!

BTW - you still show a total ignorance for how things happen in my country, euric! lol!

And how come you are only *really* funny on the metricsucks forum?