Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#12
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
How much (snow) did you get?
Shortwave Sportfishing wrote: On 13 Feb 2006 06:46:34 -0800, wrote: Reggie Smithers wrote: wrote: Shortwave Sportfishing wrote: On Sun, 12 Feb 2006 15:31:23 GMT, Don White wrote: Shortwave Sportfishing wrote: On Sun, 12 Feb 2006 15:01:05 GMT, Don White wrote: Harry Krause wrote: As of 6 am, we've had maybe three to four inches of snow, and it's still coming down, though lightly. Out on the Bay, today: NW winds 25 kt with gusts up to 35 kt. Waves 3 to 4 ft. Morning snow. Vsby 1 nm or less...increasing to 1 to 3 nm this afternoon. At the moment, our forecast states: Snow this morning...then a chance of snow this afternoon. New snow accumulation of 1 to 3 inches. Total accumulation 5 to 10 inches...less along the Chesapeake Bay. Breezy with highs in the mid 30s. Northwest winds 15 to 25 mph. Gusts up to 40 mph this morning. Snow just started here at approx 1100 AST. We may get between 15-20 cm before it's over. cm? freakin' metric system. One day the US will catch up with the civilized world! Screw the "civilized" world. We got along with the fractional system for a hell of a lot longer than that pansy metric system. Yeah, why would anybody want a system that actually makes sense? We don't need no stinking logic. It takes a real man to understand the fractional system, and it makes it easy to weed out the deadwood or those moving up in the years and are not as sharp as they once were. Consider it Darwin for the industrial world. -- Reggie SO, it's your conclusion that, because something has worked prior to now, that it's good enough? Is it also your conclusion that something that makes perfect mathematical sense shouldn't be used just because we have a system that, although it's a system that's inherently easy to make mistakes with, should be used over a system that is not? When they miscalculated the last Mars mission, did they use the metric system? :) I think "Darwin for the industrial world" is wanting to keep an antiquated, hard to use system that makes little or no sense. Notice in the below website how much of the world has developed the metric system. U.S. is almost the only country who hasn't. Ever wonder why? That's because the metric system is for morons who can't count, divide or understand simple fractional constants. http://www.metric4us.com/ Now, if you notice, our number system works on a base 10 system. NOT base 16, or 32, or 64, or 8 or 4 or 2. Now it isn't rocket science, but when our system DOES get complicated is when you need to convert one set of units to another. Take for example something simple like what does a quart of water weigh? First, you need to know the weight of a gallon, then divide by four. Yes, I know it sounds easy, but what could be easier than knowing that a liter is one kilo. Or, instantly you'd know it's 1000 grams. That quart? you need to divide now by 16 to get ounces. So? Real engineers and scientists use the fractional system. Tell me, what's 2/3s of 100? In metric. It's exactly the same as it is here, of course. What makes you think that the metric system can't or doesn't use fractions? What is .01? Now what you've failed to take into account, is that, again, our number system is a base 10 system. Wouldn't you think that a volumn, mass, measurement, etc. system that is base 10 would work better than one that is not? If not, please tell why a system that doesn't have any reasonable base is much better than one that works exactly as we count? |
#13
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
How much (snow) did you get?
Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:
On 13 Feb 2006 06:46:34 -0800, wrote: Reggie Smithers wrote: wrote: Shortwave Sportfishing wrote: On Sun, 12 Feb 2006 15:31:23 GMT, Don White wrote: Shortwave Sportfishing wrote: On Sun, 12 Feb 2006 15:01:05 GMT, Don White wrote: Harry Krause wrote: As of 6 am, we've had maybe three to four inches of snow, and it's still coming down, though lightly. Out on the Bay, today: NW winds 25 kt with gusts up to 35 kt. Waves 3 to 4 ft. Morning snow. Vsby 1 nm or less...increasing to 1 to 3 nm this afternoon. At the moment, our forecast states: Snow this morning...then a chance of snow this afternoon. New snow accumulation of 1 to 3 inches. Total accumulation 5 to 10 inches...less along the Chesapeake Bay. Breezy with highs in the mid 30s. Northwest winds 15 to 25 mph. Gusts up to 40 mph this morning. Snow just started here at approx 1100 AST. We may get between 15-20 cm before it's over. cm? freakin' metric system. One day the US will catch up with the civilized world! Screw the "civilized" world. We got along with the fractional system for a hell of a lot longer than that pansy metric system. Yeah, why would anybody want a system that actually makes sense? We don't need no stinking logic. It takes a real man to understand the fractional system, and it makes it easy to weed out the deadwood or those moving up in the years and are not as sharp as they once were. Consider it Darwin for the industrial world. -- Reggie SO, it's your conclusion that, because something has worked prior to now, that it's good enough? Is it also your conclusion that something that makes perfect mathematical sense shouldn't be used just because we have a system that, although it's a system that's inherently easy to make mistakes with, should be used over a system that is not? When they miscalculated the last Mars mission, did they use the metric system? :) I think "Darwin for the industrial world" is wanting to keep an antiquated, hard to use system that makes little or no sense. Notice in the below website how much of the world has developed the metric system. U.S. is almost the only country who hasn't. Ever wonder why? That's because the metric system is for morons who can't count, divide or understand simple fractional constants. http://www.metric4us.com/ Now, if you notice, our number system works on a base 10 system. NOT base 16, or 32, or 64, or 8 or 4 or 2. Now it isn't rocket science, but when our system DOES get complicated is when you need to convert one set of units to another. Take for example something simple like what does a quart of water weigh? First, you need to know the weight of a gallon, then divide by four. Yes, I know it sounds easy, but what could be easier than knowing that a liter is one kilo. Or, instantly you'd know it's 1000 grams. That quart? you need to divide now by 16 to get ounces. So? Real engineers and scientists use the fractional system. Tell me, what's 2/3s of 100? In metric. 66.67? |
#14
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
How much (snow) did you get?
Don White wrote:
Shortwave Sportfishing wrote: On 13 Feb 2006 06:46:34 -0800, wrote: Reggie Smithers wrote: wrote: Shortwave Sportfishing wrote: On Sun, 12 Feb 2006 15:31:23 GMT, Don White wrote: Shortwave Sportfishing wrote: On Sun, 12 Feb 2006 15:01:05 GMT, Don White wrote: Harry Krause wrote: As of 6 am, we've had maybe three to four inches of snow, and it's still coming down, though lightly. Out on the Bay, today: NW winds 25 kt with gusts up to 35 kt. Waves 3 to 4 ft. Morning snow. Vsby 1 nm or less...increasing to 1 to 3 nm this afternoon. At the moment, our forecast states: Snow this morning...then a chance of snow this afternoon. New snow accumulation of 1 to 3 inches. Total accumulation 5 to 10 inches...less along the Chesapeake Bay. Breezy with highs in the mid 30s. Northwest winds 15 to 25 mph. Gusts up to 40 mph this morning. Snow just started here at approx 1100 AST. We may get between 15-20 cm before it's over. cm? freakin' metric system. One day the US will catch up with the civilized world! Screw the "civilized" world. We got along with the fractional system for a hell of a lot longer than that pansy metric system. Yeah, why would anybody want a system that actually makes sense? We don't need no stinking logic. It takes a real man to understand the fractional system, and it makes it easy to weed out the deadwood or those moving up in the years and are not as sharp as they once were. Consider it Darwin for the industrial world. -- Reggie SO, it's your conclusion that, because something has worked prior to now, that it's good enough? Is it also your conclusion that something that makes perfect mathematical sense shouldn't be used just because we have a system that, although it's a system that's inherently easy to make mistakes with, should be used over a system that is not? When they miscalculated the last Mars mission, did they use the metric system? :) I think "Darwin for the industrial world" is wanting to keep an antiquated, hard to use system that makes little or no sense. Notice in the below website how much of the world has developed the metric system. U.S. is almost the only country who hasn't. Ever wonder why? That's because the metric system is for morons who can't count, divide or understand simple fractional constants. http://www.metric4us.com/ Now, if you notice, our number system works on a base 10 system. NOT base 16, or 32, or 64, or 8 or 4 or 2. Now it isn't rocket science, but when our system DOES get complicated is when you need to convert one set of units to another. Take for example something simple like what does a quart of water weigh? First, you need to know the weight of a gallon, then divide by four. Yes, I know it sounds easy, but what could be easier than knowing that a liter is one kilo. Or, instantly you'd know it's 1000 grams. That quart? you need to divide now by 16 to get ounces. So? Real engineers and scientists use the fractional system. Tell me, what's 2/3s of 100? In metric. 66.67? Don, I think you are incorrect. I come up with 66.66666667 -- Reggie ************************************************** ************* That's my story and I am sticking to it. ************************************************** ************* |
#15
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
How much (snow) did you get?
"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message ... On 13 Feb 2006 06:46:34 -0800, wrote: Reggie Smithers wrote: wrote: Shortwave Sportfishing wrote: On Sun, 12 Feb 2006 15:31:23 GMT, Don White wrote: Shortwave Sportfishing wrote: On Sun, 12 Feb 2006 15:01:05 GMT, Don White wrote: Harry Krause wrote: As of 6 am, we've had maybe three to four inches of snow, and it's still coming down, though lightly. Out on the Bay, today: NW winds 25 kt with gusts up to 35 kt. Waves 3 to 4 ft. Morning snow. Vsby 1 nm or less...increasing to 1 to 3 nm this afternoon. At the moment, our forecast states: Snow this morning...then a chance of snow this afternoon. New snow accumulation of 1 to 3 inches. Total accumulation 5 to 10 inches...less along the Chesapeake Bay. Breezy with highs in the mid 30s. Northwest winds 15 to 25 mph. Gusts up to 40 mph this morning. Snow just started here at approx 1100 AST. We may get between 15-20 cm before it's over. cm? freakin' metric system. One day the US will catch up with the civilized world! Screw the "civilized" world. We got along with the fractional system for a hell of a lot longer than that pansy metric system. Yeah, why would anybody want a system that actually makes sense? We don't need no stinking logic. It takes a real man to understand the fractional system, and it makes it easy to weed out the deadwood or those moving up in the years and are not as sharp as they once were. Consider it Darwin for the industrial world. -- Reggie SO, it's your conclusion that, because something has worked prior to now, that it's good enough? Is it also your conclusion that something that makes perfect mathematical sense shouldn't be used just because we have a system that, although it's a system that's inherently easy to make mistakes with, should be used over a system that is not? When they miscalculated the last Mars mission, did they use the metric system? :) I think "Darwin for the industrial world" is wanting to keep an antiquated, hard to use system that makes little or no sense. Notice in the below website how much of the world has developed the metric system. U.S. is almost the only country who hasn't. Ever wonder why? That's because the metric system is for morons who can't count, divide or understand simple fractional constants. http://www.metric4us.com/ Now, if you notice, our number system works on a base 10 system. NOT base 16, or 32, or 64, or 8 or 4 or 2. Now it isn't rocket science, but when our system DOES get complicated is when you need to convert one set of units to another. Take for example something simple like what does a quart of water weigh? First, you need to know the weight of a gallon, then divide by four. Yes, I know it sounds easy, but what could be easier than knowing that a liter is one kilo. Or, instantly you'd know it's 1000 grams. That quart? you need to divide now by 16 to get ounces. So? Real engineers and scientists use the fractional system. Tell me, what's 2/3s of 100? In metric. Why, that's the official number of the Democratic party! 66.66666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666 66666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666 66 |
#16
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
How much (snow) did you get?
On Mon, 13 Feb 2006 14:38:59 -0500, Reggie Smithers
wrote: Don White wrote: Shortwave Sportfishing wrote: On 13 Feb 2006 06:46:34 -0800, wrote: Reggie Smithers wrote: wrote: Shortwave Sportfishing wrote: On Sun, 12 Feb 2006 15:31:23 GMT, Don White wrote: Shortwave Sportfishing wrote: On Sun, 12 Feb 2006 15:01:05 GMT, Don White wrote: Harry Krause wrote: As of 6 am, we've had maybe three to four inches of snow, and it's still coming down, though lightly. Out on the Bay, today: NW winds 25 kt with gusts up to 35 kt. Waves 3 to 4 ft. Morning snow. Vsby 1 nm or less...increasing to 1 to 3 nm this afternoon. At the moment, our forecast states: Snow this morning...then a chance of snow this afternoon. New snow accumulation of 1 to 3 inches. Total accumulation 5 to 10 inches...less along the Chesapeake Bay. Breezy with highs in the mid 30s. Northwest winds 15 to 25 mph. Gusts up to 40 mph this morning. Snow just started here at approx 1100 AST. We may get between 15-20 cm before it's over. cm? freakin' metric system. One day the US will catch up with the civilized world! Screw the "civilized" world. We got along with the fractional system for a hell of a lot longer than that pansy metric system. Yeah, why would anybody want a system that actually makes sense? We don't need no stinking logic. It takes a real man to understand the fractional system, and it makes it easy to weed out the deadwood or those moving up in the years and are not as sharp as they once were. Consider it Darwin for the industrial world. -- Reggie SO, it's your conclusion that, because something has worked prior to now, that it's good enough? Is it also your conclusion that something that makes perfect mathematical sense shouldn't be used just because we have a system that, although it's a system that's inherently easy to make mistakes with, should be used over a system that is not? When they miscalculated the last Mars mission, did they use the metric system? :) I think "Darwin for the industrial world" is wanting to keep an antiquated, hard to use system that makes little or no sense. Notice in the below website how much of the world has developed the metric system. U.S. is almost the only country who hasn't. Ever wonder why? That's because the metric system is for morons who can't count, divide or understand simple fractional constants. http://www.metric4us.com/ Now, if you notice, our number system works on a base 10 system. NOT base 16, or 32, or 64, or 8 or 4 or 2. Now it isn't rocket science, but when our system DOES get complicated is when you need to convert one set of units to another. Take for example something simple like what does a quart of water weigh? First, you need to know the weight of a gallon, then divide by four. Yes, I know it sounds easy, but what could be easier than knowing that a liter is one kilo. Or, instantly you'd know it's 1000 grams. That quart? you need to divide now by 16 to get ounces. So? Real engineers and scientists use the fractional system. Tell me, what's 2/3s of 100? In metric. 66.67? Don, I think you are incorrect. I come up with 66.66666667 Not nearly precise enough for government work. -- 'Til next time, John H ****************************************** ***** Have a Spectacular Day! ***** ****************************************** |
#17
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
How much (snow) did you get?
On Mon, 13 Feb 2006 20:01:25 GMT, "NOYB" wrote:
"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message .. . On 13 Feb 2006 06:46:34 -0800, wrote: Reggie Smithers wrote: wrote: Shortwave Sportfishing wrote: On Sun, 12 Feb 2006 15:31:23 GMT, Don White wrote: Shortwave Sportfishing wrote: On Sun, 12 Feb 2006 15:01:05 GMT, Don White wrote: Harry Krause wrote: As of 6 am, we've had maybe three to four inches of snow, and it's still coming down, though lightly. Out on the Bay, today: NW winds 25 kt with gusts up to 35 kt. Waves 3 to 4 ft. Morning snow. Vsby 1 nm or less...increasing to 1 to 3 nm this afternoon. At the moment, our forecast states: Snow this morning...then a chance of snow this afternoon. New snow accumulation of 1 to 3 inches. Total accumulation 5 to 10 inches...less along the Chesapeake Bay. Breezy with highs in the mid 30s. Northwest winds 15 to 25 mph. Gusts up to 40 mph this morning. Snow just started here at approx 1100 AST. We may get between 15-20 cm before it's over. cm? freakin' metric system. One day the US will catch up with the civilized world! Screw the "civilized" world. We got along with the fractional system for a hell of a lot longer than that pansy metric system. Yeah, why would anybody want a system that actually makes sense? We don't need no stinking logic. It takes a real man to understand the fractional system, and it makes it easy to weed out the deadwood or those moving up in the years and are not as sharp as they once were. Consider it Darwin for the industrial world. -- Reggie SO, it's your conclusion that, because something has worked prior to now, that it's good enough? Is it also your conclusion that something that makes perfect mathematical sense shouldn't be used just because we have a system that, although it's a system that's inherently easy to make mistakes with, should be used over a system that is not? When they miscalculated the last Mars mission, did they use the metric system? :) I think "Darwin for the industrial world" is wanting to keep an antiquated, hard to use system that makes little or no sense. Notice in the below website how much of the world has developed the metric system. U.S. is almost the only country who hasn't. Ever wonder why? That's because the metric system is for morons who can't count, divide or understand simple fractional constants. http://www.metric4us.com/ Now, if you notice, our number system works on a base 10 system. NOT base 16, or 32, or 64, or 8 or 4 or 2. Now it isn't rocket science, but when our system DOES get complicated is when you need to convert one set of units to another. Take for example something simple like what does a quart of water weigh? First, you need to know the weight of a gallon, then divide by four. Yes, I know it sounds easy, but what could be easier than knowing that a liter is one kilo. Or, instantly you'd know it's 1000 grams. That quart? you need to divide now by 16 to get ounces. So? Real engineers and scientists use the fractional system. Tell me, what's 2/3s of 100? In metric. Why, that's the official number of the Democratic party! 66.6666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666 66666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666 666 The correct answer is: 66 and 2/3rds. But Tom will never accept the truth. -- 'Til next time, John H ****************************************** ***** Have a Spectacular Day! ***** ****************************************** |
#18
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
How much (snow) did you get?
"Reggie Smithers" wrote in message . .. wrote: Reggie Smithers wrote: wrote: Shortwave Sportfishing wrote: On Sun, 12 Feb 2006 15:31:23 GMT, Don White wrote: Shortwave Sportfishing wrote: On Sun, 12 Feb 2006 15:01:05 GMT, Don White wrote: Harry Krause wrote: As of 6 am, we've had maybe three to four inches of snow, and it's still coming down, though lightly. Out on the Bay, today: NW winds 25 kt with gusts up to 35 kt. Waves 3 to 4 ft. Morning snow. Vsby 1 nm or less...increasing to 1 to 3 nm this afternoon. At the moment, our forecast states: Snow this morning...then a chance of snow this afternoon. New snow accumulation of 1 to 3 inches. Total accumulation 5 to 10 inches...less along the Chesapeake Bay. Breezy with highs in the mid 30s. Northwest winds 15 to 25 mph. Gusts up to 40 mph this morning. Snow just started here at approx 1100 AST. We may get between 15-20 cm before it's over. cm? freakin' metric system. One day the US will catch up with the civilized world! Screw the "civilized" world. We got along with the fractional system for a hell of a lot longer than that pansy metric system. Yeah, why would anybody want a system that actually makes sense? We don't need no stinking logic. It takes a real man to understand the fractional system, and it makes it easy to weed out the deadwood or those moving up in the years and are not as sharp as they once were. Consider it Darwin for the industrial world. -- Reggie SO, it's your conclusion that, because something has worked prior to now, that it's good enough? Is it also your conclusion that something that makes perfect mathematical sense shouldn't be used just because we have a system that, although it's a system that's inherently easy to make mistakes with, should be used over a system that is not? I think "Darwin for the industrial world" is wanting to keep an antiquated, hard to use system that makes little or no sense. Notice in the below website how much of the world has developed the metric system. U.S. is almost the only country who hasn't. Ever wonder why? http://www.metric4us.com/ Now, if you notice, our number system works on a base 10 system. NOT base 16, or 32, or 64, or 8 or 4 or 2. Now it isn't rocket science, but when our system DOES get complicated is when you need to convert one set of units to another. Take for example something simple like what does a quart of water weigh? First, you need to know the weight of a gallon, then divide by four. Yes, I know it sounds easy, but what could be easier than knowing that a liter is one kilo. Or, instantly you'd know it's 1000 grams. That quart? you need to divide now by 16 to get ounces. Bassy, It was a extremely sarcastic, tongue in cheek, comment, sorry you went to all that trouble to help me understand the stupidity of not converting to metric system. I have always thought it made sense, and having both metric and standard bolts and screws drives that point home everyday. When someone says "We don't need no stinking logic", they probably are either stupid or being sarcastic, or as in my situation, both. -- Reggie ************************************************** ************* That's my story and I am sticking to it. ************************************************** ************* Nah, we should convert to Wentworth. |
#19
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
How much (snow) did you get?
"Harry Krause" wrote in message ... Calif Bill wrote: "Reggie Smithers" wrote in message . .. wrote: Reggie Smithers wrote: wrote: Shortwave Sportfishing wrote: On Sun, 12 Feb 2006 15:31:23 GMT, Don White wrote: Shortwave Sportfishing wrote: On Sun, 12 Feb 2006 15:01:05 GMT, Don White wrote: Harry Krause wrote: As of 6 am, we've had maybe three to four inches of snow, and it's still coming down, though lightly. Out on the Bay, today: NW winds 25 kt with gusts up to 35 kt. Waves 3 to 4 ft. Morning snow. Vsby 1 nm or less...increasing to 1 to 3 nm this afternoon. At the moment, our forecast states: Snow this morning...then a chance of snow this afternoon. New snow accumulation of 1 to 3 inches. Total accumulation 5 to 10 inches...less along the Chesapeake Bay. Breezy with highs in the mid 30s. Northwest winds 15 to 25 mph. Gusts up to 40 mph this morning. Snow just started here at approx 1100 AST. We may get between 15-20 cm before it's over. cm? freakin' metric system. One day the US will catch up with the civilized world! Screw the "civilized" world. We got along with the fractional system for a hell of a lot longer than that pansy metric system. Yeah, why would anybody want a system that actually makes sense? We don't need no stinking logic. It takes a real man to understand the fractional system, and it makes it easy to weed out the deadwood or those moving up in the years and are not as sharp as they once were. Consider it Darwin for the industrial world. -- Reggie SO, it's your conclusion that, because something has worked prior to now, that it's good enough? Is it also your conclusion that something that makes perfect mathematical sense shouldn't be used just because we have a system that, although it's a system that's inherently easy to make mistakes with, should be used over a system that is not? I think "Darwin for the industrial world" is wanting to keep an antiquated, hard to use system that makes little or no sense. Notice in the below website how much of the world has developed the metric system. U.S. is almost the only country who hasn't. Ever wonder why? http://www.metric4us.com/ Now, if you notice, our number system works on a base 10 system. NOT base 16, or 32, or 64, or 8 or 4 or 2. Now it isn't rocket science, but when our system DOES get complicated is when you need to convert one set of units to another. Take for example something simple like what does a quart of water weigh? First, you need to know the weight of a gallon, then divide by four. Yes, I know it sounds easy, but what could be easier than knowing that a liter is one kilo. Or, instantly you'd know it's 1000 grams. That quart? you need to divide now by 16 to get ounces. Bassy, It was a extremely sarcastic, tongue in cheek, comment, sorry you went to all that trouble to help me understand the stupidity of not converting to metric system. I have always thought it made sense, and having both metric and standard bolts and screws drives that point home everyday. When someone says "We don't need no stinking logic", they probably are either stupid or being sarcastic, or as in my situation, both. -- Reggie ************************************************** ************* That's my story and I am sticking to it. ************************************************** ************* Nah, we should convert to Wentworth. You studied the Wentworth system in engineering school? I'm glad I was an English major; one of my professors had a vintage British car and introduced us to the history of Sir Joseph Whitworth. So, tell us about the Wentworth system. Did you not ever wrench on a British Motorcycle? A wrench is the bolt size not the head size. |
#20
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
How much (snow) did you get?
Shortwave Sportfishing wrote: On 13 Feb 2006 10:16:44 -0800, wrote: Shortwave Sportfishing wrote: On 13 Feb 2006 06:46:34 -0800, wrote: Reggie Smithers wrote: wrote: Shortwave Sportfishing wrote: On Sun, 12 Feb 2006 15:31:23 GMT, Don White wrote: Shortwave Sportfishing wrote: On Sun, 12 Feb 2006 15:01:05 GMT, Don White wrote: Harry Krause wrote: As of 6 am, we've had maybe three to four inches of snow, and it's still coming down, though lightly. Out on the Bay, today: NW winds 25 kt with gusts up to 35 kt. Waves 3 to 4 ft. Morning snow. Vsby 1 nm or less...increasing to 1 to 3 nm this afternoon. At the moment, our forecast states: Snow this morning...then a chance of snow this afternoon. New snow accumulation of 1 to 3 inches. Total accumulation 5 to 10 inches...less along the Chesapeake Bay. Breezy with highs in the mid 30s. Northwest winds 15 to 25 mph. Gusts up to 40 mph this morning. Snow just started here at approx 1100 AST. We may get between 15-20 cm before it's over. cm? freakin' metric system. One day the US will catch up with the civilized world! Screw the "civilized" world. We got along with the fractional system for a hell of a lot longer than that pansy metric system. Yeah, why would anybody want a system that actually makes sense? We don't need no stinking logic. It takes a real man to understand the fractional system, and it makes it easy to weed out the deadwood or those moving up in the years and are not as sharp as they once were. Consider it Darwin for the industrial world. -- Reggie SO, it's your conclusion that, because something has worked prior to now, that it's good enough? Is it also your conclusion that something that makes perfect mathematical sense shouldn't be used just because we have a system that, although it's a system that's inherently easy to make mistakes with, should be used over a system that is not? When they miscalculated the last Mars mission, did they use the metric system? :) I think "Darwin for the industrial world" is wanting to keep an antiquated, hard to use system that makes little or no sense. Notice in the below website how much of the world has developed the metric system. U.S. is almost the only country who hasn't. Ever wonder why? That's because the metric system is for morons who can't count, divide or understand simple fractional constants. http://www.metric4us.com/ Now, if you notice, our number system works on a base 10 system. NOT base 16, or 32, or 64, or 8 or 4 or 2. Now it isn't rocket science, but when our system DOES get complicated is when you need to convert one set of units to another. Take for example something simple like what does a quart of water weigh? First, you need to know the weight of a gallon, then divide by four. Yes, I know it sounds easy, but what could be easier than knowing that a liter is one kilo. Or, instantly you'd know it's 1000 grams. That quart? you need to divide now by 16 to get ounces. So? Real engineers and scientists use the fractional system. Tell me, what's 2/3s of 100? In metric. It's exactly the same as it is here, of course. What makes you think that the metric system can't or doesn't use fractions? What is .01? Now what you've failed to take into account, is that, again, our number system is a base 10 system. Wouldn't you think that a volumn, mass, measurement, etc. system that is base 10 would work better than one that is not? If not, please tell why a system that doesn't have any reasonable base is much better than one that works exactly as we count? 1 - You have got to be kidding me - right? I'm a mathematician for cripes sake - you think I was serious? Good lord. :) 2 - I much prefer base 12 - more reliable and less prone to transcription or transcribing errors. Hmm, you're a mathematician????? Hehe!!! And you use base 12 for everyday math? Really? When you go to the store and buy something, do you count the money in base 12? |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
How much (snow) did you get? | General | |||
How much (snow) did you get? | General | |||
For you in the snow | General | |||
North Dakota news | ASA | |||
Snow? | General |