|
How much (snow) did you get?
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. |
How much (snow) did you get?
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! |
How much (snow) did you get?
"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message ... 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. It'll change when the ads read "Increase your penis by 5 cm, overnight". RCE |
How much (snow) did you get?
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? |
How much (snow) did you get?
|
How much (snow) did you get?
|
How much (snow) did you get?
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? 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. I tell my students, when they're ****ing and moaning about fractions and conversions, to write their congressmen and ask them to get us on the metric system. Hell, if GMC can do it, we all should. -- 'Til next time, John H ****************************************** ***** Have a Spectacular Day! ***** ****************************************** |
How much (snow) did you get?
JohnH 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? 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. I tell my students, when they're ****ing and moaning about fractions and conversions, to write their congressmen and ask them to get us on the metric system. Hell, if GMC can do it, we all should. -- 'Til next time, John H I agree. I do a lot of design work for companies that are based overseas, and that are building in this country. Once you get over the mentality that you need to think of 300mm as *very close to a foot* and use it enough so you know approx. how long it is, life is good! Too many people have to convert, and least in their heads. |
How much (snow) did you get?
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. PS - I thought my "Darwin of the Industrial World" would be the sure give away that it was sarcasm. -- Reggie ************************************************** ************* That's my story and I am sticking to it. ************************************************** ************* |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:24 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com