The metric system sucks
in [Math]
|
Prev: connecting Luminet-Poincare Dodecahedral Space with AP-Reverse -Concavity for 10% #379 Correcting Math
Next: Cantor's Diagonal?
From: Bart Goddard on 3 Feb 2010 15:09 "Heidi Graw" <hgraw(a)telus.net> wrote in news:FRian.62309$Db2.57427(a)edtnps83: > Actually, I don't care what sort of measuring system the US uses. > I don't need to buy American if I want metric components for > my European imported machinery and equipment. I've spent many fine Summers in Canada, and one of the first things I've noticed is that concrete blocks are 8 x 16 inches, floor tiles are 1 sq. ft, building studs are 2 x 4 (minus 1/2 inch each way), etc. You may not care, but you're walking on it. > So, while the rest of the world marches on, Americans > are certainly free to remain behind. Right, people who use your preferred system are "ahead" while anyone else is "behind". This is an odd definition of "ahead" and "behind", and is, in fact, just a restatement of the original, unsupported thesis. B. -- Cheerfully resisting change since 1959.
From: Bart Goddard on 3 Feb 2010 15:15 Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18(a)verizon.invalid> wrote in news:hkc1pu$fks$1(a)news- int2.gatech.edu: > If one agrees that the systems of units should be standardized, Sure, skip over the main issue. Is there some compelling reason that we should all be the same? Should we demolish all those interesting European cities and rebuild them on the Nebraska-Cartesian model, with nice straight streets meeting at right angles? Surely language differences are a bigger barrier to trade than measuring systems. So under the same arguments, since English is the most spoken language in the world, shouldn't we insist that everyone dump their "old, outdated, insanely hard to learn languages" in preference for English? The first words out of a...uh...decimaphile's mouth is "Oh, the Metric system is so much easier." If so, what's the big deal. If it's easy, then there's no problem. Certainly it's way easier to learn metric than to learn French. B. -- Cheerfully resisting change since 1959.
From: Tronscend on 3 Feb 2010 16:02 Hi, excellent parody; a trifle long, though. T "Andrew Usher" <k_over_hbarc(a)yahoo.com> skrev i melding news:242d41ed-7890-4154-8f0d-146ce2675881(a)c29g2000yqd.googlegroups.com... > I. Introduction > > LEFTIST POLITICS is one of the great errors of our age. [ By leftism I .....
From: Ken S. Tucker on 3 Feb 2010 17:08 On Feb 3, 4:53 am, Bart Goddard <goddar...(a)netscape.net> wrote: > jmfbahciv <jmfbahciv(a)aol> wrote innews:hkbq66327kt(a)news3.newsguy.com: > > > Bart Goddard wrote: > >> "Heidi Graw" <hg...(a)telus.net> wrote in > >>news:tC4an.64378$PH1.2203(a)edtnps82: > > >>> He prefers the metric. It's easier to learn and easier to use. > >>> I also prefer metric for those same reasons. > > >> Which is also a reason for choosing Cosmetology school > >> over Engineering. > > >> B. > > > Now try cooking. Before you respond with another snotty post, > > think chefs. > > Don't tell me what to do, whippersnapper. I cook a lot > and I brew a whopping amount of beer. And I gotta say > that beer made with metric units just doesn't taste as > good. Malt in pounds, water in gallons, hops in ounces... > the way God meant it to be! Yeah and you squash grapes with 2 feet. How do you do that in MEtric? Guess that's why MEtric peoples don't drink wine, unless it's made by us, the common folks. Ken
From: Bruce on 3 Feb 2010 17:28
Uncle Al <UncleAl0(a)hate.spam.net> wrote in news:4B68D95B.3E30E7C5 @hate.spam.net: > Andrew Usher wrote: > > How many 64ths of an inch are in a mile, idiot? 64*12*5280...big effin deal. Now tell me what the speed of light is in furlongs per fortnight. No such interesting abilities in the bland world of metric.....then you can build me an exact 1/6 scale model of a 1957 Chevy in metric. --- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: news(a)netfront.net --- |