Previous  1 ... 5  6  7  8  9  10  11 ... 15  Next

It wouldn't really work for length.

Most people would prefer to have warmer weather than colder weather - so farenheit is superior to celsius. Imperial farenheit fits along the scale perfectly - zero ic cold, 40-50 is average temperature, and 80-90 is boiling hot. But for length it isn't the case that most people prefer big things to small things.

Whereas the French Napoleonic system (the French can't get much right) has the STUPID system that 50 celsius is the TOP end of the scale, for warmer weather, and zero is round about AVERAGE.

The reason why the same won't apply to length is because most people prefer to have warmer weather than colder weather, and the farenheir scale uses big numbers for high temperatures whereas the bizaare celsius one uses small numbers for high temperatures, so farenheit gives the impression that the weather is warmer.

For example, if you were an overweight person you would probably prefer to measure your waist size in inches rather than millimetres to make it look as though your waist is SMALLER. Not everythign that is bigger in size is better.

   

Yeah, but your weight in kilo's, instead of lbs

   

My weight is in stones, not kilos or pounds.

I'm around 13 stones.

   

Still in the "stone" age then?

   

I agree with celsius's bizaare measurements.

Metris is too scientific. It has based itself, sor some unexplainable reason, on the boiling point of water! Someone decided that when water boils that'll be 100 celsius, and when it freezes that'll be zero celsius.

So it's perfect if you are some scientist who needs to measure the temperature of water, but what about the ordinary guy, the ordinary person who wants to meausre the temperature if he wants to go to the beach? In that case, the celsius is just crazy.

In Imperial farenheit, as I've said many times, it's perfect to measure weather temperature. 15F is cold, 40 is around average, and 90F is boiling hot.

As usual, Imperial takes its measurement for simple, natural things that everyone understands (in this case basing Farenheit on whether it feels warm or cold outside) whereas Metric bases its measurements on complicated scientific jargon that only scientists originally understand, such as basing Celsius on the boiling point of water, which therefore really only works to measure water temperature but becomes lopsided when measuring the temperature of the weather outdoors)

   

It was rhetorical - that higher numbers trick you into thinking it's warmer is pretty dumb.
It works perfectly to measure outside temperature - below zero and your plants are going to freeze and you need a heavy jacket, above zero the plants are ok and you can wear a lighter jacket.

The fact that you're an idiot who thinks boiling water is "complicated scientific jargon" doesn't support your cause, nor does the method of standardization limit the use of the units.

   

Do you even know how to convert it? Because those are way off. If you convert that to celcius, 15F would be approxminately - 8.5 (Give or take 1 degree) So if the water was that, it would be frozen. 40 would be about 4 or 5 . And 90 would be about 30. So basically, learn how to do math.

   

Agreed. I suck ass at science (Check the science puzzle thread ) and it makes sense to me.

   

Again, using 12s is better than using 10s.

For a start, 12 is divisible by more numbers: 1, 2, 3, 4, 6 and 12.

Whereas 10 is only divisible by 1, 2, 5 and 10.

Using the above argument then it's not too hard to see why the French pack their wine bottles in boxes of 12 rather than 10.

Because it's more efficient that way, if you think about it.

Packing wine in boxes of 12 means that each box can be easily divided if someone wanted a third of those bottles or a half.

Packed in boxes of 10 then how would you obtain a third of the wine? You could get a half - 5 - but not a third.

Everything going up by 12 means it's more fraction-friendly than going up in 10s.

As it says here in an article about the use of Metric measurements in Canada:






Here are some other good points:








In fact, Imperial measures are probably MORE widespread, or just as widespread, in Canada than Metric.

Here's the beginning of a letter written by a Canadian:



REPLY FROM SAM MALIN

Dear xxxxxxx,

You letter to BWMA was forwarded to me, a fellow Canadian.

You obviously live in a different Canada from me, or, perhaps more accurately you see the world, or at least Canada, through metric-tinted glasses.

Let's walk together from my apartment on Burdett Avenue in Victoria. As we leave the drive we pass the 5 mph sign on the left we turn left - ah there is the entrance to the law courts parking lot Max Height 6'7" (1.98m) is marked. I offer you a coke "on tap" at the Macs - is that 8oz 12oz or 16oz.

Shall we drop into Safeway - you show me lots of metric packaging (often with exact equivalents of Canadian units e.g. 568 ml, 454 g etc). But then I draw your attention to the Lucerne butter in a plastic container labelled 1 lb. And I drag a reluctant you to the loose fruits and vegetables where, like everywhere else in Canada they are priced sold in pounds and ounces (with kg and g sometimes indicated).

You are pretty upset and say lets take the ferry to Vancouver to get away from these "imperial" (more on "imperial" later) units. Again with apparent shock, you notice that the distances to the ferry terminal and intermediate towns like Sidney are given in miles as well as km. When we arrive at the terminal, the boards giving the fares state that vehicles over 20 feet (no metric equivalent given) long. We arrive in Tsawassen, on the Vancouver side, driving to Vancouver we pass some small farms for sale - 25 acres, 45 acres no hectares. On arrival in Vancouver there are some large notices placed by the city by the roadside concerning re-zoning. All dimensions are in feet only. Similarly, signs up for office space and apartments are in square feet ... only. We cross Vancouver to take the Skyride up Grouse Mountain. The (new) information board at the bottom states that the vertical climb is 4500 feet (and only in feet).

Let's go to Alberta shall we? No you say - you have already seen the dual unit height signs on bridges there.

We then talk about other matters and in passing you ask me my height (I am tall) "six six" I say. You then state your height in feet and inches. I don't rub it in - for virtually all Canadians of all ages give their heights in feet and inches and their weights in pounds.




To read the rest, go here: http://www.bwmaonline.com/Imperial%20Origins.htm

   

Volume consumption has nothing to do with which measurements we should use. Both are easy, but 10 is by far easier then people who aren't very talented at math. How hard is it to remember 10 millimetre to a centimetre, 100 to a metre, 1000 to a kilometre? For fucks sake people in grade 2 can do that!

For Imperial isn't it 12 inches to a foot, 3 feet to a yard, and 1760 yards in a mile. Oh yeah, that's a lot easier to remember.

   

Oh shit! You were talking about the air! ok discard this post. (And you're temps still suck. 4-5 is not average and 30 is not boiling hot.)

   

10 Fingers. 10 toes.

   

Yeah, units of 10 are soooo superior!!

And before you bang on too much about how measuring everything into units of 10, 100 and 1000 is easier than divided things into 12s or whatever then remember that TIME is divided into Imperial-like measures:

60 secs = 1 min
60 mins = 1 hour
24 hours = 1 day
14 days = 1 week
52 weeks = 1 year

Time isn't divided into 10s, 100s and 1000s but it's still VERY easy to understand ts divisions.

   

ROTFL

   

When you pro-Metric people are losing the argument the only thing you can do is add silly laughing smilies.

   

Previous  1 ... 5  6  7  8  9  10  11 ... 15  Next