Author Topic: BONG ..And Here is the Not News..BONG (Read 163826 times)

Well, we did, but then we decided to undo it all, because it was European or people with grey hair didn't understand it or something like that. But if we all went metric, would that make audaxers a bit less unusual?

Kim · « **Reply #284 on:** 02 May, 2015, 12:37:43 pm »

Quote from: hellymedic on 02 May, 2015, 12:01:51 pm

Baby's weight announced in avoirdupois.

Have we really not gone a bit metric yet?

Not for baby weights (along with all the other things that otherwise sensible metric-using people insist in using old fashioned measures for). People with babies always talk about them in pounds and ounces. Which tbh doesn't bother me, as I've no idea what a baby is supposed to weigh anyway, so will be referring to a percentile chart before I can form an opinion, which makes the conversion back to kilograms the easy bit.

Anyway, since the royal family seem to exist primarily for the benefit of the Express and the USAnian tourist industry, it makes sense to use their native units.

mattc · « **Reply #285 on:** 02 May, 2015, 12:42:21 pm »

Most people DO know the typical baby weight range in pounds. [I admit that I myself am a lttle hazy!]

I see no purpose in switching to kg. Does anyone need to calculate the baby's acceleration for a force (given in Newtons) ? Or her heat capacity?

clarion · « **Reply #286 on:** 02 May, 2015, 12:44:29 pm »

Babies (at least in the NHS) are measured & recorded in metric. Archaic and arcane systems are probably one of the things we taxpayers are shelling out extra for in this case.

hellymedic · « **Reply #287 on:** 02 May, 2015, 01:07:37 pm »

Archaic weights have a comfortable familiarity. Term newborns are around 7lb and comparisons sound simple so this female is on the big side.
Given she has tall parents, good nutrition, care and had the full nine months' incubation, this is no surprise.

Kim · « **Reply #288 on:** 02 May, 2015, 01:10:07 pm »

Quote from: hellymedic on 02 May, 2015, 01:07:37 pm

Archaic weights have a comfortable familiarity.

...is what old people assume.

The way I see it, if you're going to use base 16 units, then they need to be represented by the digits 0-F for comfortable familiarity.

Jurek · « **Reply #289 on:** 02 May, 2015, 01:21:42 pm »

Quote from: clarion on 02 May, 2015, 12:44:29 pm

Babies (at least in the NHS) are measured & recorded in metric. Archaic and arcane systems are probably one of the things we taxpayers are shelling out extra for in this case.

Steady on, Clarion. That's uncharacteristically modernist of you, to have your youngest calibrated in anything other than traditional units.

hellymedic · « **Reply #290 on:** 02 May, 2015, 01:36:18 pm »

Quote from: Kim on 02 May, 2015, 01:10:07 pm

Quote from: hellymedic on 02 May, 2015, 01:07:37 pm
Archaic weights have a comfortable familiarity.

...is what old people assume.

The way I see it, if you're going to use base 16 units, then they need to be represented by the digits 0-F for comfortable familiarity.

But stones and pounds are base 14 to confuzzle the enemy further.

I admit to finding familiarity with old units useful for the semi-innumerate.

Newborn = ½ stone
2 year old = 2 stone
8 year old = 4 stone
Adult = 10 stone

These numbers worked before people got FAT. Weight based dosages could be simple and errors with decimal places spotted rather easily.

Redlight · « **Reply #291 on:** 02 May, 2015, 01:53:59 pm »

So how many Olympic size swimming pools is that?

Kim · « **Reply #292 on:** 02 May, 2015, 01:55:59 pm »

Quote from: hellymedic on 02 May, 2015, 01:36:18 pm

But stones and pounds are base 14 to confuzzle the enemy further.

This is one of those things where the USAnians have the right idea - at least in the sense of having a slightly less bad implementation of the wrong idea.

(I'm currently reading an alternate history series where an industrialising 17th century Europe seems to be standardising on decimal feet, as a compromise between politics and common sense.)

bikenrrd · « **Reply #293 on:** 02 May, 2015, 03:33:12 pm »

I know that my daughter was 3.76kg at birth, but would have to use google to figure at what this is in pounds / ounces.
At one year old she was 8.2kg and I weigh 67kg and measure 176cm.

Using old, anachronistic units just annoys me. I do work in science, though.

Can anyone remember how long the non-news dominated the real-news last time a royal sprogged? I can't watch it at the moment due to the high frequency of Nicholas Witchell.

Mr Larrington · « **Reply #294 on:** 02 May, 2015, 04:22:32 pm »

Quote from: Redlight on 02 May, 2015, 01:53:59 pm

So how many Olympic size swimming pools is that?

Hold up, this is a Royal sprog we're talking about and thus should be measured in Wales-related units.

Biggsy · « **Reply #295 on:** 02 May, 2015, 05:14:51 pm »

The problem comes later in life when asked your weight. Nurses these days don't know what a stone is. You reach for a calculator, remember the figure 2.2, strain to think whether it's 2.2 kg in a pound or vice versa, and finally take away the first number you thought of.

I was a 9 pound baby. That's the heaviest I've ever been. (in relation to the average person of my age)

mattc · « **Reply #296 on:** 02 May, 2015, 05:15:56 pm »

Quote from: Redlight on 02 May, 2015, 01:53:59 pm

So how many Olympic size swimming pools is that?

UNITS !!!

/teacher

I think you meant African Elephants.

(whose ears weigh upto 3 stone, apparently - I've been waiting to drop that trivia into "everyday" conversation ... )

Bledlow · « **Reply #297 on:** 02 May, 2015, 05:21:17 pm »

Quote from: Kim on 02 May, 2015, 01:55:59 pm

(I'm currently reading an alternate history series where an industrialising 17th century Europe seems to be standardising on decimal feet, as a compromise between politics and common sense.)

What's that, then? (Interest aroused). Any good?

sg37409 · « **Reply #298 on:** 02 May, 2015, 05:26:45 pm »

Quote from: Kim on 02 May, 2015, 12:37:43 pm

Anyway, since the royal family seem to exist primarily for the benefit of the Express and the USAnian tourist industry, it makes sense to use their native units.

SHould have given its length as well then. USanian's seem to quote weight and length. I was prepared for the 1st but when they asked the length..

Jaded · « **Reply #299 on:** 02 May, 2015, 05:36:58 pm »

Going on about one system of measurement over another is silly.

Presumably the metric goons never pickup a handful of something, or come back in a while, or take a few steps.