America needs to finally adopt the metric system.

Originally posted by mortje
Call it a mix of chauvinism and stubbornness. If you're brought up with a system many would hate to lose it, even if it makes more sense.

Except for the fact that metric doesn't make more sense just because you base it on multiples of 10. Metric is irregular. I'm not being stubborn, but rather, realizing that it makes no sense to switch to metric just because it's scientific. Let the scientists use it if they like, the whole country should have to switch over accordingly.

As far as Fahrenheit and Celsius go, I'm going to have to disagree with you on that one as well. Again, it's irregular. It's not easier just because water freezes at 0 and boils at 100, you're just using a different reference point. I have to reiterate: when you're cooking, Celsius is a hassle just as much as metric is.

I wouldn't hate to lose the English system due to the fact that I was "brought up" with it, but rather because the metric system is irregular and irksome.

Originally posted by TasteTheMagick
I'm going to have to agree with Voxel on this one. We don't need "one world system" just like we don't need "one world" anything else. Like I said, you're not going to persuade me into using or liking that silly metric system.

EDIT: Actually, let me give you an even further reason. I do a lot of cooking, it's one of my favorite things to do. Metric just isn't practical when it comes to recipes. In fact: it's awful. I've tried.

[edit on 1/22/09 by TasteTheMagick]

There is only "one world" way of writing mathematics equation, "one world" way of writing music, only "one world" way of establishing medecine dosage (and it is only Metrics) (like so many centimeter cube "cc" or grams (gr) of such and such medecine).

Does not work too bad, isn't?

Metrics and cooking is awful??, wow there are 6.5 billions people - roughly 300 millions Americans who can barely cook, amazing.

Originally posted by PopeyeFAFL
There is only "one world" way of writing mathematics equation, "one world" way of writing music, only "one world" way of establishing medecine dosage (and it is only Metrics) (like so many centimeter cube "cc" or grams (gr) of such and such medecine).

Does not work too bad, isn't?

Metrics and cooking is awful??, wow there are 6.5 billions people - roughly 300 millions Americans who can barely cook, amazing.

We're not talking about mathematics here and there is not only one way of writing music. And it's funny that you say there's only one way of establishing medicine dosage because my bottles of medicine almost ALWAYS have the dosage listed in teaspoons and such.

The 300 million Americans that can barely cook can't be chalked up to metrics vs. english, but rather a market saturation of food that comes already cooked with only a need to stick in in an oven or microwave.

Except for the fact that metric doesn't make more sense just because you base it on multiples of 10. Metric is irregular. I'm not being stubborn, but rather, realizing that it makes no sense to switch to metric just because it's scientific. Let the scientists use it if they like, the whole country should have to switch over accordingly. As far as Fahrenheit and Celsius go, I'm going to have to disagree with you on that one as well. Again, it's irregular. It's not easier just because water freezes at 0 and boils at 100, you're just using a different reference point. I have to reiterate: when you're cooking, Celsius is a hassle just as much as metric is. I wouldn't hate to lose the English system due to the fact that I was "brought up" with it, but rather because the metric system is irregular and irksome.

Irregular? 10, 100, 1 000, doesn't seem so irregular. There are 1 000 meters in a kilometer,
1 000 grams in a kilogram, 100 centimeters in a meter. Need I go on? How is that irregular? There are seven simple base units upon which ever other metric unit is built. Hardly irregular.

Whereas in your English system, 12 inches in a foot, but 16 ounces in a pound. Is that really regular? What about 3 feet in a yard but 5 280 feet in a mile? How is that regular?

Over 6 billion people can cook with Celsius. The temperature scales are just a matter of familiarity. The only reason why we would switch to Celsius is simply because it is metric and comes with the rest of the system. Did you know that there are some people who can't even remember the temperatures at which water freezes and boils in Fahrenheit?

We're not talking about mathematics here and there is not only one way of writing music. And it's funny that you say there's only one way of establishing medicine dosage because my bottles of medicine almost ALWAYS have the dosage listed in teaspoons and such. The 300 million Americans that can barely cook can't be chalked up to metrics vs. english, but rather a market saturation of food that comes already cooked with only a need to stick in in an oven or microwave.

Bottles of medicine only have teaspoons because that is the only thing that the pharmacists think that people understand. Medicine is all dosed in milliliters and milligrams, and then translated into English units for the public. And very small amounts of liquid, such as for infants, are already in milliliters; teaspoons would be too inaccurate.

I'm going to have to agree with Voxel on this one. We don't need "one world system" just like we don't need "one world" anything else. Like I said, you're not going to persuade me into using or liking that silly metric system. EDIT: Actually, let me give you an even further reason. I do a lot of cooking, it's one of my favorite things to do. Metric just isn't practical when it comes to recipes. In fact: it's awful. I've tried.

Metric cooking is actually more accurate. Cooking by weight is much more accurate than cooking by volume. For example, if you have 1 cup of flour, it could actually be 20% more or 20% less than what you really want, since you're measuring the volume of the flour, which includes air. But metric cooking involves using a scale; so 400 grams of flour is 400 grams of flour.

You also don't have to mess around with measuring cups. Just put the bowl on the scale, hit "tare" and start adding the ingredients. Hit "tare" and add the next ingredient.

[edit on 24-1-2009 by Totakeke]

reply to post by Totakeke


All you're doing is RE-explaining things I have already told you I am well aware of. The irregularity that comes from metric is not in it's conversions but it's day to day use.

Would you mind telling me WHY, in a day to day situation, you would be converting miles into feet or inches anyway? There's no logical reason to do so.

I've never had this problem with cooking where a cup of flour is 20% more or less than what I want.

Here's the ultimate point I'm making: I am extremely familiar with BOTH the metric and the english system. I have used both for a number of activities. From my own experience I have discovered that I do not like the metric system. I will never like the metric system or find it easier to use. There's no amount of re-explaining you can do to make me change my mind, frankly, because it's getting frustrating.

If you are a scientist, use the metric system all you like. I am not a scientist, I hate the metric system.

On a side note: 86F will never feel like a 30...86 degrees SOUNDS more accurate than 30 degrees Celsius.

All you're doing is RE-explaining things I have already told you I am well aware of. The irregularity that comes from metric is not in it's conversions but it's day to day use.

How is that irregular? Please explain, because all over the world metric works for day-to-day use. They use kilometers and kilograms just like we use miles and pounds.

Would you mind telling me WHY, in a day to day situation, you would be converting miles into feet or inches anyway? There's no logical reason to do so.

For some people it's their job. Chemists work with measures of volume at least ten times per day. Converting from pints to fluid ounces and fluid ounces to pints causes mistakes, and has no place in science. It's the same with manufacturing. Most manufacturing is done in metric because as measurements become smaller metric has to be used. Plenty of people go to work every day and have to do pointless and error-prone math just to mix and match English units.

Here's the ultimate point I'm making: I am extremely familiar with BOTH the metric and the english system. I have used both for a number of activities. From my own experience I have discovered that I do not like the metric system. I will never like the metric system or find it easier to use. There's no amount of re-explaining you can do to make me change my mind, frankly, because it's getting frustrating.

And here's my ultimate point: I don't believe that. You seem to think that the metric system is irregular and a "one-world system," but it's neither of those things. If you truly have used both systems, side by side, then you'll know which one takes less time and is more efficient. There's a reason why scientists use metric.

On a side note: 86F will never feel like a 30...86 degrees SOUNDS more accurate than 30 degrees Celsius.

86 degrees Fahrenheit is no more accurate than 30 degrees Celsius or 545 Rankine or 303 Kelvins. There's accuracy and then there's resolution, and Fahrenheit feigns accuracy that isn't there.

That's also why I think it's just a reference point issue. When many people say they don't like metric, they really mean that they just don't use it. Of course if I went to France French would seem hard because I don't know it that well, but to someone who has learned French it's easy. It's the same with metric.

I've never had this problem with cooking where a cup of flour is 20% more or less than what I want.

There's no way to be sure of that, unless you measured the exact volume of the flour somehow and made it perfectly packed and made sure there was no air in between the flour. That's also why professional chefs use metric.

[edit on 25-1-2009 by Totakeke]

Originally posted by Totakeke
For some people it's their job.

And those people can use metric if they want. I don't like it. I'm never going to like it.

And here's my ultimate point: I don't believe that. You seem to think that the metric system is irregular and a "one-world system," but it's neither of those things. If you truly have used both systems, side by side, then you'll know which one takes less time and is more efficient. There's a reason why scientists use metric.

Metric IS a "one world" system. Aren't you the first person that stated that and said it was better that way? Metric isn't faster than English, I can use both at the same speed. Like I said before, scientists can use it all they like, I will not.

86 degrees Fahrenheit is no more accurate than 30 degrees Celsius or 545 Rankine or 303 Kelvins. There's accuracy and then there's resolution, and Fahrenheit feigns accuracy that isn't there.

That's also why I think it's just a reference point issue.

I never said either was more accurate. I said earlier that temperature IS just a reference point issue. Again: I just don't like Celsius.

There's no way to be sure of that, unless you measured the exact volume of the flour somehow and made it perfectly packed and made sure there was no air in between the flour. That's also why professional chefs use metric.

There IS a way to be sure of that. I have cooked with both. I don't like using metric in cooking, I think it's awful. It's my own opinion.

I know a LOT of professional chefs. I'm around them on an almost daily basis. Out of the professional chefs that I know, only a small fraction of those use metric for cooking.

The metric system is so much easier and accurate. Plus, with it, you don't need to be using fractions. Everything is converted to decimals.
I'm pretty sure that Americans will end up changing their system sooner or later to the one that the REST OR THE WORLD uses.

There IS a way to be sure of that. I have cooked with both. I don't like using metric in cooking, I think it's awful. It's my own opinion.

If you pour flour into a "1 cup" measuring cup, there's no way of knowing exactly how much flour there is, because, again, there's empty space in there.

Metric IS a "one world" system. Aren't you the first person that stated that and said it was better that way? Metric isn't faster than English, I can use both at the same speed. Like I said before, scientists can use it all they like, I will not.

Metric isn't faster than English? Really? Could you do the number of furlongs in 20 leagues in your head? How about the amount of pecks in 15.7 bushels? With metric those kinds of problems take a few seconds. Even with more everyday measurements, such as feet in 18 miles, it requires a calculator. But meters to kilometers and kilometers to meters definitely takes less take, because instead of calculating you just push around a decimal point.

I never said either was more accurate.

No, but you said Fahrenheit "sounds" more accurate.

All I'm asking for is a one sentence answer as to why you don't like the metric system. Is it reference points? Is it something against France? (I'm really leaning towards reference points.)

[edit on 27-1-2009 by Totakeke]

Simple reason why Americans hate the metric system:
because all through grade school we were taught the English system, then in the 7th grade they spring the metric system on us and expect us to grasp it. It's not that easy to switch systems after years of learning the other way. I know my problem as a kid was trying to compare each metric measurement with English Measurements and it drove me crazy!
Also the government would probably create a new department called the Metric system conversion department, spending more taxy payers money.

Yes!!! Thank you, thank you, thank you for this thread! When we didn't adopt it, it made us look stupid, like we couldn't understand it. My neighbors north and south are fine with it, but, noooooo, we had to resist changing over. Bah!

reply to post by Totakeke


I have told why I don't like the metric system a number of times. Why should I have to condense it all down to one sentence? I don't like it. I never will, and if you want to know why you can go back and read my posts.

And I said Fahrenheit "sounded" accurate as a joke...didn't you see the emote?

Simple reason why Americans hate the metric system: because all through grade school we were taught the English system, then in the 7th grade they spring the metric system on us and expect us to grasp it. It's not that easy to switch systems after years of learning the other way. I know my problem as a kid was trying to compare each metric measurement with English Measurements and it drove me crazy! Also the government would probably create a new department called the Metric system conversion department, spending more taxy payers money.

Metric isn't hard. In fact, most people who either have to learn it for their jobs or because they move to a metric country find it much easier.

Taxpayers money? Switching to metric is much cheaper than the money not switching wastes.

I have told why I don't like the metric system a number of times. Why should I have to condense it all down to one sentence? I don't like it. I never will, and if you want to know why you can go back and read my posts.

After going back through the thread I've found these reasons why you don't like metric (in no particular order).

Except for the fact that metric doesn't make more sense just because you base it on multiples of 10. Metric is irregular. I'm not being stubborn, but rather, realizing that it makes no sense to switch to metric just because it's scientific. Let the scientists use it if they like, the whole country should have to switch over accordingly.

First, you claim it's irregular, which it isn't. It's based on 10 and 7 base units, and that's it. There really isn't much there. It works for everyone else, it can work for America.

You know, I am very familiarized with both systems and I can honestly say that I hate, hate, HATE the metric system. It's annoying and I can't stand it and I'm not going to start using it just because the rest of the world does. They want everything in metric? Let them convert it.

Here (above) you just say you hate it.

No matter HOW many times you argue about metric being "easy", I will never EVER use it because I don't like it. In fact, I hate it and have already said so.

And here.

Here's the ultimate point I'm making: I am extremely familiar with BOTH the metric and the english system. I have used both for a number of activities. From my own experience I have discovered that I do not like the metric system. I will never like the metric system or find it easier to use. There's no amount of re-explaining you can do to make me change my mind, frankly, because it's getting frustrating.

And here as well.

I've gone back over this thread many times and I can't find any reason why you don't like using metric, other than "irregularity," which isn't even true.

I don't care if you don't like the metric system. I really don't. I would just like to know why; and up until this point, I can't find a reason.

reply to post by Totakeke


I told you, I don't find it necessary in everyday life. 3 feet...i.e. 1 yard...is a very common measurement and I use it fairly often. Now, if I were to say this common measurement in metric...what should I use?

Centimeters?
91.44

Decimeters?
9.144

Meters?
0.9144

It's all an irregular measurement. None of those numbers are whole. No amount of converting will make the numbers whole. 3 feet, or 1 yard is much easier in a day to day context.

I told you, I don't find it necessary in everyday life. 3 feet...i.e. 1 yard...is a very common measurement and I use it fairly often. Now, if I were to say this common measurement in metric...what should I use? Centimeters? 91.44 Decimeters? 9.144 Meters? 0.9144 It's all an irregular measurement. None of those numbers are whole. No amount of converting will make the numbers whole. 3 feet, or 1 yard is much easier in a day to day context.

3 feet in 1 yard? First, that's definitely irregular. There's no way around the fact that the English system was based upon centuries of body parts and nothing more. No standards or anything. There is only one metric measure for length and that's the meter. Plain and simple. Second, since yards aren't metric you wouldn't see 91.44 centimeters, 9.144 decimeters, etc. It would be rounded. Those measurements would be 100 centimeters, 10 decimeters, and 1 meter. Third, decimeters are almost never used, the same with dekameters and hectometers. The only "meters" most people use are the kilometer, meter, centimeter, and millimeter.

You can choose which magnitude you prefer. If you're comfortable with longer decimals fine, use meters. But if whole numbers work better then you can use millimeters. It's still the same value. But in daily life you would probably use meters and round to the nearest meter. If you were talking about height it would be to the nearest centimeter. Just like "English" daily life, "metric" daily life has its own units, too.

You do know that with metric the need to convert is gone, right? There is no more "3 feet in 1 yard" because metric is all base 10.

[edit on 29-1-2009 by Totakeke]

Originally posted by Totakeke
3 feet in 1 yard? First, that's definitely irregular. There's no way around the fact that the English system was based upon centuries of body parts and nothing more. No standards or anything. There is only one metric measure for length and that's the meter. Plain and simple. Second, since yards aren't metric you wouldn't see 91.44 centimeters, 9.144 decimeters, etc. It would be rounded. Those measurements would be 100 centimeters, 10 decimeters, and 1 meter. Third, decimeters are almost never used, the same with dekameters and hectometers. The only "meters" most people use are the kilometer, meter, centimeter, and millimeter.

You can choose which magnitude you prefer. If you're comfortable with longer decimals fine, use meters. But if whole numbers work better then you can use millimeters. It's still the same value. But in daily life you would probably use meters and round to the nearest meter. If you were talking about height it would be to the nearest centimeter. Just like "English" daily life, "metric" daily life has its own units, too.

You do know that with metric the need to convert is gone, right? There is no more "3 feet in 1 yard" because metric is all base 10.

[edit on 29-1-2009 by Totakeke]

3 feet in 1 yard is not irregular. It's a common fit for a common measurement. I don't want everything rounded up just because my exact measurement falls into decimals. People don't normally say "three feet in one yard" they say one or the other.

Base 10 does NOT automatically mean that something is easier.

Now here's what I don't understand: I have answered your question. I've told you that I know and understand the metric system and the english system. I even went and answered you "why do you hate metric?" question FURTHER after all the reasons I gave you before.

And yet you STILL insist on re-explaining the metric system to me. I don't need it explained. I know how to use it. I don't like to use it.

reply to post by TasteTheMagick



After looking through this thread, the only reason I see why you don't like the metric system is that 1) you aren't used to it and 2) you can't see how they would be better on a day to day basis. So here are a couple day to day examples where conversions between distances and volumes are required (I would think that 9 out of 10 Americans wouldn't be able to answer these):

You have a 1.25 acre lot that you need to spread grass seed on. How many bags of seed would you need to buy if one bag covers ten square feet?

You're trying to follow directions that say to follow a road for 1200 yards and then turn left . You come up to a sign that says bridge out in 1/2 mile, should you turn around now?

Your trying to make some pancakes for 5 people from a recipe that feeds 10 people and that calls for 2/3 cup of oil. Your measuring cup is already dirty so how many tablespoons are needed?

The metric equivalent of these questions can be done in your head.

The main reasons that the USA should switch to metric is because its:
Coherent (easy for anyone to learn)
Universal (used by 90% of worlds population)
Legal (congressional power to dictate)
Planned (designed not collected)

Originally posted by rookhouse
reply to post by TasteTheMagick

 

After looking through this thread, the only reason I see why you don't like the metric system is that 1) you aren't used to it and 2) you can't see how they would be better on a day to day basis. So here are a couple day to day examples where conversions between distances and volumes are required (I would think that 9 out of 10 Americans wouldn't be able to answer these):

You have a 1.25 acre lot that you need to spread grass seed on. How many bags of seed would you need to buy if one bag covers ten square feet?

You're trying to follow directions that say to follow a road for 1200 yards and then turn left . You come up to a sign that says bridge out in 1/2 mile, should you turn around now?

Your trying to make some pancakes for 5 people from a recipe that feeds 10 people and that calls for 2/3 cup of oil. Your measuring cup is already dirty so how many tablespoons are needed?

The metric equivalent of these questions can be done in your head.

The main reasons that the USA should switch to metric is because its:
Coherent (easy for anyone to learn)
Universal (used by 90% of worlds population)
Legal (congressional power to dictate)
Planned (designed not collected)

5,445

No

21 Tablespoons and 1 teaspoon

I just did all of those in my head.

I have never said that I am not used to the metric system. I am very familiar with it.

Well, I wasn't really asking you to answer those questions. My point was there are some conversions that people do between English units once in a while, that can be done much easier with metric units. Do you really think 9 out of 10 Americans can do these calculations in their head?

btw- You got the second and third questions wrong. (although I had to go look it up)
1/2mile =880yards
1/3cup = 5.28 tbsp

No matter how many examples I present, you are correct that there are going to be certain people who don’t benefit directly from the metric system because they don’t do any type of conversions (either inches to miles or miles to kg). But the argument that the USA should not switch to the metric system because of these people is self-defeating. Because if you don’t really do those conversions than you will not be drastically affected - negatively or positively. So there is really no real reason for these people to argue against the general adoption except for the principles of non-change. Here’s an analogy to demonstrate my point:

Lets say you live in the suburbs and 60% of the people in your town travel by car into the city everyday. Some of those people propose building a train station which would connect your town to the metropolis because they realize that a train station would have an upfront cost, but in the long run, would drastically improve efficiency, reduce accidents, reduce costs of infrastructure, and improve your town’s communication with the metropolis. If your commute is in the opposite direction and wouldn’t directly benefit from a train station on a daily basis, would you still actively oppose the building of the train route? Even if your commute is slightly modified, wouldn’t it be silly to try to prevent the improvement because you are slightly inconvenienced? Can’t you see that the train station would be beneficial to your town as a whole? Isn’t it a possibility, that for those once a year occurrences, like when your mother-in-law comes to visit, that the train station could be useful if you did require a trip to the city? (Although you would have to spend a couple of minutes to learn how to use it.) (and if you wanted to, you can still drive your car to the city the same way you always did using the old roads system.)