Metric is a silly system invented by the French. The American system is far more colorful and occasionally more accurate. Viva cultural differences!
You're on your own with regard to the silliness aspect, but there's evidence that a Metric system was actually of British origin by Oliver Cromwell's brother-in-law - the Dean of Ripon, John Wilkins. To be more precise, the genesis of a decimal system originated by him well over 100 years before it was 'invented' by the (silly) French.
It was, unfortunately, intermingled with the myriad of arcane measures in use at the time, some of which still are. Certainly, James Watt advocated a global system in the early 1780s but the British Parliament later failed to take up an offer from the French National Assembly to collaborate on its creation. I can't imagine why ... :biggrin1:
On that theme, you may find this interesting, written by Wilkins in 1668:
An ESSAY Towards a REAL CHARACTER, And a PHILOSOPHICAL LANGUAGE - John Wikins
It's a pdf, sorry.
Fahrenheit is more precise than Celsius because there are smaller increments. Why change to a less precise system just because water boils or freezes within the range?
But isn't the metric linear measurement scale is more precise than the imperial one in terms of whole units - which is I assume what your referring to? While technically more 'precise' wasn't the Fahrenheit scale based on an fundamentally flawed assumption by its creator. That doesn't render it invalid, merely something of an anachronism.
You're also incorrect about the accuracy. Both systems are equally accurate. Metric is simply more convenient to anyone too lazy to learn a more complex standardized system with arguably greater benefit of usability.
But the 'imperial' system is anything but standardised. And if both systems are
equally accurate (as you said, at length) why would one benefit from a adopting a complex system over a simple one? It's not laziness, it's efficiency.
Besides, the imperial system is replete with exceptions, approximations and international variations that tend to render it inaccurate and unreliable other than for approximations. This may have had something to do with the inception of a standardised system and its subsequent adoption by 95% of the world.
The American system uses things we might see or know everyday to give us a rough approximation the way metric can't. It's much easier to imagine feet or yards and indeed, you can walk out feet yourself and not be terribly far off.
That's exactly the point,
familiarity. It's easier for you because you are
familiar with such measurements. As pointed out by a poster earlier they are equally comfortable with the metric system they grew up with, and use on a daily basis. To 'metricated' folk such measurements are equally intuitive and thus 'easier'.
Jason, you're entitled to your view, as is anyone - but have the decency to accept that's all it is - a personal preference, please don't try to dress it up as fact, makes you sound like Phil.
I couldn't care less what system the US (or any nation uses) because one is comfortable with measures one knows - but the inherent
mathematical simplicity and harmony of the decimal system over the variable imperial system is surely undeniable, even by you. Personally, I'm comfortable with either and can interchange between the common 'measures' as necessary.
On a side note; perhaps as a nod to Mexico, I read that Interstate 19, the freeway running from Nogalez to Tucson, is posted in Km ... so perhaps there's hope for you yet.:wink:
The British dont use it anymore. The only country that uses the Imperial system is the USA.
As MB has pointed out, that's not really the case. As of 2007, in addition to the US, Myanmar and Liberia are the only countries yet to adopt the metric system as their official system of measurement. Many others are still in states of 'transition' and mixed usage.