POLL: Should Canada return to Imperial Measurements.
Previous 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 15 Next
Blue_Nose @ Sat Apr 14, 2007 9:06 pm
Not only does the US lag behind the rest of the civilized world in adopting metric, they're tardy in adopting Limit States Design over Allowable Stress Design - much more so a pain in the ass than converting inches to mm could ever be.
I really don't understand it - it's like they want to be at the forefront of innovation, but not if they didn't come up with it first.
Istanbul @ Sat Apr 14, 2007 9:35 pm
Brenda Brenda:
sasquatch2 sasquatch2:
$1:
Blue Nose
None of those things are metric, so I fail to see how that answers my question, Mr. Rolling Eyes.
Canada uses the metric SI like everyone else.
None of those things are metric, so I fail to see how that answers my question, Mr. Rolling Eyes.
Canada uses the metric SI like everyone else.
Okay Bakka...... there are different litres, metres etc depending upon which country you go to.
Japanese metric is different than French or German......
Huh??? Could you explain the difference?
In Germany a million millimeters is equal to 1 kilometer while in Japan it is equal to 100,000 centimeters!
GreatBriton @ Sat May 05, 2007 10:51 am
$1:
All of science is based upon metric.
Then can you explain why astronomical measurements such as the light year, the astronomical unit (au) and the parsec are all Imperial measurements?
Can you explain why we measure time using Imperial measurements (seconds, days, hours, weeks, etc)?
60 seconds=1 minute
60 minutes=1 hour
24 hours=1 day
7 days=1 week
Those measurents aren't based on tens, hundreds and thousands.
Imperial measurements usually all base their measurements upon nature (and surely you can't get more natural than that) - which is why the "light year" (which is 5 trillion, 879 billion miles) is based upon the lenth that light travels in one year.
The astronomical unit is derived from the distance from the Earth to the Sun - around 93 million miles.
Surely the light year and the parsec, both Imperial measurements, aren't exactly "out of date".
The day is the time it takes for the Earth to spin once on its axis, and the year the times it takes to complete one orbit of the Sun.
(It's a mystery to me how measurements can be out of date anyway. We've used days, weeks, hours, minutes, seconds etc for centuries, and they seem to work fine).
Also, when I go into a good old British pub I prefer to buy a PINT of beer. Saying to the barmaid "Can I have a half litre, please?" doesn't have quite the same ring to it as "Can I have a pint, please?".
The US isn't the only country to use Imperial. The British use it, too. We measure our height in feet and inches (I'm around 5 feet 8 inches) and not metres and centimetres. Most of us don't know our heights in those silly measurements.
We measure our weight in stones - I'm around 10 stones - and NOT in kilograms.
We buy our groceries in measurements of pounds (lbs) and ounces (oz).
Why should the British use a system invented by 18th Century Napoleonic France, an enemy of ours? It's like using a measuring system from 1940s Nazi Germany. The only countries in Europe who started using Metric measuremts are those who were invaded by Napoleon but, considering Napoleon never managed to invade Britain, then why should we use his measurements? It's only been adopted in Britain now in some areas thanks to the EU forcing it upon us.
Here's a good article to read:
Trouble with the Metric System
Host Robyn Williams and his guest Arthur Marcel, English teacher, Brisbane, Australia on the advantages of the Imperial method of measurement compared with the metric method.
http://www.tysknews.com/Depts/Metricati ... system.htm
Some quotes:
$1:
The Imperial system of measurement is an evolved system, as against the metric system which can be best described as revolutionary. [Actually, created by government decree and then the subjects were forced to utilize the metric system - not without considerable grumbling I might add.] The Imperial units were derived from commonly experienced physical objects, such as the human foot and the length of an English King's arm. Appropriate subdivisions kept unit length and number within easy human range, making them so suitable for the measurement of such common objects. The metric units, however, are reductions of astronomical size quantities, using a constant subdivision factor of ten. The length of the metre, a dimension which underpins the whole metric system, was originally (and quite erroneously, as it turned out), calculated as a fraction of the Earth's diameter.
Given their respective origins, it would be a very strange coincidence indeed if metric units were superior to Imperial ones for everyday domestic measurement applications. Perhaps though, the revolutionary origins of the metric system have something to do with the wishes of those who want it introduced across the board.
Then there is the matter of the metric distance scale. The standard metric tape that a prospective genius like myself buys in a hardware shop is not very well designed. [Be glad one side had the Imperial system on it, Artie.] As I said earlier, each centimetric division on my tape was subdivided into two half centimetric divisions which were in turn divided into five millimetric divisions. [THAT is because 2 and 5 are the ONLY numbers with which the metric system, being based on the number ten, can be evenly divided.] Now that meant that there were four millimetre graduations of equal height between each centimetre graduation (these being the tallest) and each half centimetre graduation (these being the next tallest).
When trying to make an exact measurement with this kind of tape, the eye, which is after all the final arbiter of all human measuring techniques, no matter what the intermediate machine might be, has to make a logarithmic judgement as to where on this scale of up to four equally tall graduations the pencil must fall. Now with time to spare, a comfortable desk, and just one or two operations to perform, this is not such a difficult task. [For the most part, the proponents of metric usage have just that luxury. These pointed-headed elitists sit at their desk and perform a few calculations with ease and then declare the metric system superior. Note also that the width of a typical pencil lead used for marking lumber is over a millimeter in width just by itself!] However, on a hot, gusty day, with a face full of perspiration, dust, hair and glare, it becomes truly eyeboggling. The most difficult measurements are those ending in either a two or a three, or a seven or an eight. These two graduations just blurred into one after an hour or so. Now I fully admit that it was my desire for exactness that led me to such fine measurement, however I feel it is a poor compromise to round everything off to the nearest five millimetres, something that I wasn't prepared to do. [Such rounding also leads to some very interesting, cumulative errors. I know, trust me.]
With the Imperial system I didn't have these problems. Firstly, the Imperial numbers were easier to remember. This was because each Imperial measurement is separated into two packets of easily graspable, one digit numbers [feet and inches], plus a packet of 15 possible fractions. There were 15 fractions because I was working to the nearest 1/16th of an inch, this being the thickness of my saw blade and as precise as I cared to go. Although I don't recall now, the only two digit number I could ever have encountered that week would have been eleven inches. [Oops Art, you forgot ten-inches. But why quibble at this point, right? Go on, please.] What I do recall though was that not only could I consistently remember the current number but I could remember a lot of the previous ones as well, to the point of not having to refer to the plan for subsequent cuts of the same type.
Given their respective origins, it would be a very strange coincidence indeed if metric units were superior to Imperial ones for everyday domestic measurement applications. Perhaps though, the revolutionary origins of the metric system have something to do with the wishes of those who want it introduced across the board.
Then there is the matter of the metric distance scale. The standard metric tape that a prospective genius like myself buys in a hardware shop is not very well designed. [Be glad one side had the Imperial system on it, Artie.] As I said earlier, each centimetric division on my tape was subdivided into two half centimetric divisions which were in turn divided into five millimetric divisions. [THAT is because 2 and 5 are the ONLY numbers with which the metric system, being based on the number ten, can be evenly divided.] Now that meant that there were four millimetre graduations of equal height between each centimetre graduation (these being the tallest) and each half centimetre graduation (these being the next tallest).
When trying to make an exact measurement with this kind of tape, the eye, which is after all the final arbiter of all human measuring techniques, no matter what the intermediate machine might be, has to make a logarithmic judgement as to where on this scale of up to four equally tall graduations the pencil must fall. Now with time to spare, a comfortable desk, and just one or two operations to perform, this is not such a difficult task. [For the most part, the proponents of metric usage have just that luxury. These pointed-headed elitists sit at their desk and perform a few calculations with ease and then declare the metric system superior. Note also that the width of a typical pencil lead used for marking lumber is over a millimeter in width just by itself!] However, on a hot, gusty day, with a face full of perspiration, dust, hair and glare, it becomes truly eyeboggling. The most difficult measurements are those ending in either a two or a three, or a seven or an eight. These two graduations just blurred into one after an hour or so. Now I fully admit that it was my desire for exactness that led me to such fine measurement, however I feel it is a poor compromise to round everything off to the nearest five millimetres, something that I wasn't prepared to do. [Such rounding also leads to some very interesting, cumulative errors. I know, trust me.]
With the Imperial system I didn't have these problems. Firstly, the Imperial numbers were easier to remember. This was because each Imperial measurement is separated into two packets of easily graspable, one digit numbers [feet and inches], plus a packet of 15 possible fractions. There were 15 fractions because I was working to the nearest 1/16th of an inch, this being the thickness of my saw blade and as precise as I cared to go. Although I don't recall now, the only two digit number I could ever have encountered that week would have been eleven inches. [Oops Art, you forgot ten-inches. But why quibble at this point, right? Go on, please.] What I do recall though was that not only could I consistently remember the current number but I could remember a lot of the previous ones as well, to the point of not having to refer to the plan for subsequent cuts of the same type.
Sherminator333 @ Sat May 05, 2007 4:37 pm
And what about phrases like "the whole nine yards"
And "how many inches is that" 
GreatBriton @ Sun May 06, 2007 1:15 pm
"The whole nine yards" would become "The whole "8.2296 metres."
The American band "Nine Inch Nails" would have to change their name to "22.86 Centimeter Nails."
The "Mile High Club" would become The "1.609 344 Kilometre Club."
Tricks @ Sun May 06, 2007 2:33 pm
Inch by inch life's a cinch. Yard by yard life is hard.
Knoss @ Sun May 06, 2007 4:26 pm
$1:
"The whole nine yards" would become "The whole "8.2296 metres."
nine yard machine gun belts are no longer in use.
GreatBriton @ Wed May 09, 2007 8:42 am
BRITISH WIN BATTLE AGAINST EU TO SAVE IMPERIAL MEASURES
Yet another victory for the British over Continental Europeans who try to rule us....
Brussels backs down over plans to outlaw pounds and ounces
By IAN DRURY
9th May 2007
Daily Mail
EU says it will allow Britain to keep using Imperial measurements, as it will damage trade to the US, which uses Imperial measurements
EU was to ban Imperial measures in Britain in 2010 - but British victory ensures that the ban will not go ahead
Britain is to keep its pounds and ounces.
Campaigners are celebrating after the European Commission abandoned its hugely unpopular plan to scrap the historic Imperial measures.
Brussels bureaucrats admitted that forcing traders to use only metric grams and kilos would not be 'good for business'.
The present dual labelling system, displaying both sets of measures, will now carry on indefinitely.
Neil Herron, director of the Metric Martyrs pressure group, hailed a 'monumental victory'.
Steve Thoburn, who died three years ago after losing anti-Metric campaign against Brussels
He dedicated the triumph to the memory of his friend Steven Thoburn, the Sunderland green-grocer who died at 39 as he fought his conviction for selling bananas by the pound.
Mr Herron said: "People power has forced the Commission and the Government to abandon the enforced metrication programme.
"We have saved the pint, the mile, the yard, the foot and now we have saved pounds and ounces. We have stood toe to toe with the Government and the EU and won - and shown others that you can stop the tide of EU legislation."
Under Brussels plans dating back to the 1990s, it would have become illegal for UK shops to display the Imperial measurements after January 1, 2010, with traders facing fines of up to £2,000.
But Industry Commissioner Gunther Verheugan performed a spectacular U-turn when he spoke to a committee of MEPs on Tuesday.
He said research had shown that the intended ban would damage trade with the US, which uses Imperial measurements for many goods.
A Commission spokesman admitted later that Mr Verheugan had backtracked after consultations with traders showed overwhelming support for dual labelling.
Mr Verheugan is expected to recommend next week that the EC rejects the proposals for metric-only measures, lifting any potential threat to feet and inches as well.
Tory spokesman Giles Chichester said: "I am happy the Commission has been persuaded that it is good not only for international business but for the British people that traditional measurements are kept. I just hope that the Government will avoid forcing metrication down the public's throat."
David Delaney, of the British Weights and Measures Association, said he was "overjoyed".
He added: "We have campaigned for 25 years to ensure choice in measures and faced many defeats. Now we are within touching distance of a final victory."
A survey by the association last November showed eight out of ten people opposed metric-only measurements.
A Department for Trade and Industry spokesman said: "The EC held a public consultation on dual labelling and we responded that we wanted to keep it. We are now waiting for a formal ruling."
But Mr Herron called the Government's reaction 'hypocritical'. He said the DTI had slipped plans to outlaw pounds and ounces completely on to the Statute Book in 2001.
Mr Thoburn, the original Metric Martyr, was convicted by magistrates in Sunderland in 2001 of using scales that could not weigh in metric units, which had become illegal the previous year.
He was given a six-month conditional discharge, but died of a heart attack three years later after the European Court of Human Rights rejected his final appeal against his conviction.
Mr Herron said he planned to campaign for a Royal Pardon for his friend.
He said: "He should never have been prosecuted and all the authorities knew it should never have happened. The name of Steve Thoburn will be chiselled into the pages of the history books."
Ian Hartley, Mr Thoburn's father-in-law, said: "He would have been so proud to see this result after years of campaigning".
Only four shopkeepers were ever prosecuted for using pounds and ounces - an offence which carried fines of up to £5,000 - as the Metric Martyrs campaign won support from millions.
At least 15 consumer surveys between 1995 and 2000 found the British people overwhelmingly rejecting metrification.
Under existing European rules, which will now not be changed, shops must use metric units as the main measurement of weight, but can display the equivalent in pounds and ounces as well.
dailymail.co.uk
Brenda @ Wed May 09, 2007 8:54 am
As long as you stay on your island with your pounds and ounces, you do what ever you want 
TheFoundersIntent @ Wed May 09, 2007 10:28 am
Who cares, and what difference does it make?
GreatBriton @ Wed May 09, 2007 10:48 am
DAILY MAIL READERS' COMMENTS
I hate metric, it does not make sense. The only reason Canada went metric is because America said they would do the same and then changed their minds and that is why I like to watch Fox news because it is still in imperial.
- Lynne, Wellingborough, Northamptonshire
---------------
When I lived in the Holland in the early 70's I was fully prepared for everything to be in metric only to find that when I went to buy gas fittings that they were "half inch". I bought some nuts and bolts only to find out that they were quarter inch BSW. The butchers sold sliced meat by the "once" (100gms) and apples were sold by the "pond" (pound). In Belgian pubs a beer is referred to as a "pintje" (small pint). When I came back to England I went to a timber yard to buy 8ft of 4X2 only to be told "you do realise that it will only be 7ft 10 sir - that's because we've gone metric and a unit of 30 cms was the nearest we could get to a foot". On the continent long lengths are expressed in metres and cms, measurements you can visualise, not the ridiculous millimetres. I went to a restaurant in the UK run by a German woman and being a bit rebellious, on seeing 9 inch mushroom pizzas on offer, asked If I could just have the 9 inch mushrooms! "Ve do not sell zem separately" was the reply.
- David Elliott, Brighton, UK
----------------
On the fact that up until 1971, Britain was probably the only country whose currency wasn't decimalised. Whereas now there are 100 pence to the pound (just as there are 100 cents to the dollar) in the old days up to 1971 Britain's currency was split into three: into pounds, shillings and pence (there were 240 pence to the pound, 12 pence to a shilling and 20 shillings to a pound). The pound was symbolised as £, the shilling as /, and the penny as d. Thus something costing one pound , two shillings and sixpence was written as £1, 2/6d.....
Britain once had a currency that only the British could understand. It was strong, proud and illogical. Children could count pennies into shillings and shillings into pounds. Overseas speculators left the currency alone because it was difficult to understand. We decimalised and the education standard fell to accommodate the simpler system. The pound now is worth almost as much as the penny at the date of metrification. The gallon as a measure of petrol was removed because of the EU, or maybe to stop us seeing the true cost going out of control. Made in England was once a mark of pride, now it's a mark of rareity. The EU was designed to remove the national characteristics of the member nations so that unity could be achieved. The French agree as long as it doesn't include them, the Germans the same, why do our politicians want to submerge us into a characterless mass? A one time nation of shopkeepers has been reduced to a mass of Tesco shoppers.
- John Sizeland, Eccles on sea norfolk
-----------
Steven Thoburn was a brave man, defending our heritage and resisting the creeping Europeanisation of our once-proud country. God bless him. This is a victory for the common sense of people like Mr Thoburn.
- Howard Geoffrey Glynn, Tongling, China
-----------------
Is this a sudden outbreak of common sense - I hope so!
- Tony, Skelmersdale UK
-----------------
That's the power of the people.
- Thomas Lennon, North Somerset
--------------------
Why not ban Europe?
- Martin, Forfar, Great Britain
--------------------
The only thing we need to be rid of is the EU. They seem to think they can remove centuries of our culture without so much as a by your leave, they are un-elected and we do not need them. This one bit of common sense is so rare that it is a cause for celebration. It should not have been considered at all and who gave them the right to even contemplate it, not the people, only the Blair fools!
- Nigel, Somerset
Hoorah! Now what about restoring farenheit to the TV weather screens and the radio forecasts? I have no idea at all what the temperature will be when I watch the news. Apart from damaging trade with the US with weights and measurements, what about the millions of people of my generation (over 50) in the UK who also feel totally disenfranchised by being forced to use the Centigrade scale?
- Rosemary, London, UK
----------------
Is this the first step on a long road to wrest back control of our country from the faceless, non elected bureaucrats and failed politicians in Brussels"?
- John G. Price, Girne,Mersin 10,Turkey
----------------
Thank you for keeping Metrification at bay.
The world is better off without "universal" anything, including measurement.
- Jane, Oakland, USA
---------------
I am not surprised they have backed down as the imperial system has been flourishing in the EU for years. Living on the Swiss-Italian border we receive, weekly, junk mail from large Italian stores where the televisions, bathroom fitments, and garden irrigation attachments are advertised in inches.
You do not see pounds, which is logic, as the kilo is and always has been the standard.
- John, Switzerland (outside the EU)
-----------------
I just wonder what freedoms we had to trade with these Euro idiots to 'allow' us to use whatever measurements we want to?
That seems to be the way it goes. Some overpaid, unelected Euro-buffoon decides that the Brits are going to have to conform to one Euro 'Standard' or another, and in order for us to get out of it, we have to surrender some other tradition.
I have a great idea, lets get out of Europe altogether and join the North America Free Trade Zone.
We have far more in Common with the USA and Canada than the Europeans.
Remember, The US and Canada became our allies AGAINST much of Europe not so long ago.
As much as anything, we could become a sovereign nation again.
- John Ford, Huntingdon UK
dailymail.co.uk
Knoss @ Wed May 09, 2007 10:50 am
I think Canada should go further with metrification adopting dacaHertz on car tachs for instance.
Brenda @ Wed May 09, 2007 11:20 am
$1:
apples were sold by the "pond" (pound)
Sorry, but a "pond" is 500 gramms, and a "pound" is 454 gramms... That is not even close to being the same
Knoss @ Wed May 09, 2007 8:58 pm
$1:
buy 8ft of 4X2 only to be told "you do realise that it will only be 7ft 10 sir - that's because we've gone metric and a unit of 30 cms was the nearest we could get to a foot".
A roof is 8' but there is a 2*4 plate above and below the board so a stud should be 7' 8"
Canadian_Mind @ Wed May 09, 2007 11:03 pm
no, boards are actually 1 and a half inches across, so you would want the studs to be 7'9" and sometimes if you want to trim off a little extra (split ends), 1 inch to spare is really tight.
Previous 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 15 Next