Yeah, I missed the logic of the 112 lb cwt.
Silly me!
Duncan
-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Potts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Duncan Bath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: March 16, 2001 11:58
Subject: RE: [USMA:11648] RE: last night in the House of Commons
>Try again, Duncan.
>
>112/140 = 0.80, not 0.75.
>
>Bill
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Duncan Bath [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>> Sent: March 16, 2001 07:59
>> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Subject: Re: [USMA:11648] RE: last night in the House of Commons
>>
>>
>> Excellent point but,
>> make that 75%.
>> Duncan
>>
>> From: Bill Potts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> To: U.S. Metric Association <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Date: March 15, 2001 23:38
>> Subject: [USMA:11648] RE: last night in the House of Commons
>>
>>
>> >>From the debate:
>> >
>> > Mr. Christopher Gill (Ludlow):
>> > It is a great pleasure to follow my hon. Friend
>> > the Member for Billericay (Mrs. Gorman).
>> > Taking a leaf out of her book, I should like to
>> > tell the House that 140 lb of pigmeat makes
>> > 1 cwt of bacon. Many people in Britain today
>> > are familiar with such equations. I could not
>> > give the metric equivalent of that equation,
>> > but I make that point to show that I have been
>> > in business, which, regrettably, not too many
>> > hon. Members these days have.
>> >
>> >What a dummy. That doesn't even need to be expressed in metric,
>> either. It
>> >simply reduces to "80% of pig meat is bacon." That has to be simpler
than
>> >his statement.
>> >
>> >Bill Potts, CMS
>> >San Jose, CA
>> >http://metric1.org [SI Navigator]
>> >
>>
>>
>
