Whisky-dave
On Thursday, 7 January 2016 04:46:10 UTC, nospam wrote:

nospam
In article <mnjr8bpjd9i457paoval5b2omguhqn4ibc@4ax.com>, Eric Stevens <eric.stevens@sum.co.nz>wrote:

philo
A linear system would now make more sense

nospam
definitely not. it would only confuse things.

it's a bit like converting to metric. not gonna happen.

Eric Stevens
It's already happening.

nospam
definitely not.

the usa tried converting to metric long ago and it did not work.

Whisky-dave
When did it try that ?

Maybe USAins are just not bright enough to understand it after all there's only a couple of oher countries which haven't been able to convert to at least some extent those countries are Myanmar (Burma) and Liberia. That should mean something.

nospam
there's also nothing wrong with imperial measurements.

Whisky-dave
othe rthan most of teh wold has gone metric and for a lot of things it's easier to use in calculations. But I admit I still use both and can understand both. I do find the metric system easier than remmebr what a fatham is and how long a furloing is and chains and drams, and fliud onouces and gallons, quarts, bushels, hectares, the hand, olympic swimming pools, car lenghs, Cow's grass, a football field.......

nospam
think about which country put people on the moon, put spacecraft on mars, did a flyby of pluto and landed a spacecraft on an asteroid.

hint: it was a country that uses imperial measurements.

Whisky-dave
http://www.space.com/3332-nasa-finally-metric.html

What country crashed a probe into mars because they got the units wrong, and it was ESA not NASA that landed a spacecraft on an asteroid.

Where did the USA go for it';s specail effects for the star wars film ?