Went paraccending while on holiday.

On our boat were a group of kids, probably no more than 15 yrs old.

They were evidentally from Geordieland!

One of the kids asked the driver how far up the parachute etc went.

He said 'xxx metres', then he said that's 500 feet.

The kids responded, with excited glee in their faces - "500 FEET !?!? COOL!".

Nothing to do with the fact that 500 is a more impressive sounding number than 200 of course!

You should have asked them after the trip how how they thought they were. My guess is they would either have used metres, or if they tried to use feet their estimation would be wildly inaccurate.

Why can't you accept the preference for feet?

Are you saying that they'd get even more excited if the man had used millimetres?

Face it, "500 ft" means a hell of a lot more to kids than a measure that rarely gets used in daily conversation.

Don't presuppose that these kids were just dumb northern kids on the look out for a big number!

500ft would mean very little to most kids (and many adults)in terms of being able to visualise the distance

Of course for smaller distances kids understand distances in feet, but above about 10ft I think most would be far more comfortable with metres

And yes the big numbers thing is a big factor, not only for kids (or northerners..) Large heights are pretty hard to visualise accurately anyway, whatever the units, so if you want to impress your mates by saying how high you went on this para thingy of course you're going to say 500ft rather than 150m!

<<500ft would mean very little to most kids (and many adults)in terms of being able to visualise the distance>>

But this is based on *your* opinion. Can't you recognise that it might be different with different people? I'm useless with lengths (ie distance along the floor) but I guessed it was 450 to 500 feet high before the bloke even said it.
Now consider that these kids were about 5ft tall - thats 100 of them on top of each other. Pretty tall.
What I'm saying is people think in different ways.

<<Of course for smaller distances kids understand distances in feet, but above about 10ft I think most would be far more comfortable with metres>>

Again - opinion.
Remember that the spaniard *naturally* expressed it in METRES FIRST. He then went on to say 500ft. It is then that the kids reacted. I'm sorry but that's how it was/is.
Most people, on all sides, recognise that the public tend to use imperial - that's what the UKMA have been critical of.

<<Large heights are pretty hard to visualise accurately anyway, whatever the units, >>

This is how *you* see it. Other's may have a different opinion (in feet or metres)

<<so if you want to impress your mates by saying how high you went on this para thingy of course you're going to say 500ft rather than 150m!>>

150 miles will certainly impress my mates! ;-)

<<<But this is based on *your* opinion. Can't you recognise that it might be different with different people? I'm useless with lengths (ie distance along the floor) but I guessed it was 450 to 500 feet high before the bloke even said it.
Now consider that these kids were about 5ft tall - thats 100 of them on top of each other. Pretty tall.
What I'm saying is people think in different ways.>>>

Of course its my opinion (Aren't we all expressing our opinions?) but that is based on what I see and hear every day. I agree many kids would use feet but more because the word is more ingrained in the english language than because they understand the measurement - ask a kid to estimate a distance accurately and most would be more comfortable with metres

<<<Most people, on all sides, recognise that the public tend to use imperial - that's what the UKMA have been critical of.>>>

and my point is that younger people often tend to 'use' imperial but don't actually 'understand' it

re (Anonymous) "...ask a kid to estimate a distance accurately and most would be more comfortable with metres..."


REPLY: That's a statement made without real evidence. There *is* evidence, however, that the overwhelming proportion of children know their height in feet and inches but are not familiar with it in metres. Ask most children to estimate the height of another person, and they'll reply in feet and inches.

Two years ago, when the BBC were filming an A.R.M. 'Amendment Day', the film crew encountered four lads around 10/11 years of age fishing.

The BBC researcher asked the boys, in turn, four questions, and these - with their replies - are below:

"How big was the biggest fish you've ever caught?"

"A bass weighing 4 1/4 lbs"

"How tall are you?"

"About 4ft 6"

"How much do you weigh?"

"About 6 stone"

"How deep is the river here?"

"About six feet"

Each boy was also asked what the equivalent in metres was. None of them knew. One of them volunteered: "We get taught metric at school, but we don't understand it"

<<ask a kid to estimate a distance accurately and most would be more comfortable with metres>>

Do yourself a favour. Ask 10 different kids that question. See what response you get. I think that you'd be in for a shock.
Granted, it might appear a bit weird asking 10 seperate kids such a question, but I can't see any other way of convincing you.

<<Two years ago, when the BBC were filming an A.R.M. 'Amendment Day', the film crew encountered four lads around 10/11 years of age fishing>>

I saw *exactly* that same report - but its just an example of how kids are. It's a genuine thing. UK life is imperial - and I say that without gloating and *still* appreciate that behind the scenes metric is hard at work doing things *for* us.

I wish things were less polarised here somtimes and just step back and look around for a bit - both 'sides'.

<<<<"How big was the biggest fish you've ever caught?"

"A bass weighing 4 1/4 lbs"

"How tall are you?"

"About 4ft 6"

"How much do you weigh?"

"About 6 stone"

"How deep is the river here?"

"About six feet">>>>

People use feet/inches for height and stone for their weight in Britain. No-one would dispute that.

In fishing I believe that lbs are used. Since any record is given in these measurements any kid who is into fishing will use lbs. A kid who is not into fishing will probably have no comprehension of how big a 4lb bass is.

So only the last question is relevant to this particular argument - and I seem to remember specifically saying that for distances up to about 10ft kids do use feet

500ft > 10ft

160 metres = no response

500 feet = response akin to familiarity with what 500 feet looks like