2002-04-09 Bill,
I think Marcus was suggesting we get all other countries to surrender their authority on weights and measures to an international standards body that recognises only SI. Thus, even if the US refuses to recognise this organisations authority, it wouldn't matter. The US would be prohibited from exporting anything that was not SI and no country would be able to legally use any FFU even to satisfy the US. In other words, the US would be forced to adopt SI due to heavy pressure from the outside world. A back door approach. I think he realises that working within the government is a waste of time. A much stronger method is needed. At least that is how I interpreted his suggestion. John ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bill Potts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, 2002-04-09 21:10 Subject: [USMA:19362] RE: Hey, a new idea! > I'm not sure what the US equivalent of BIPM would be. > > NIST/Metric is part of the Department of Commerce and is thus, unlike BIPM, > not an international body. It has also undergone a substantial reduction in > funding. Jim McCracken may be able to comment further. > > The national standards body is, of course, ANSI, which has many many other > things on its plate than just SI. They do their bit by conforming to SI > within their own standards documents (which, of course, form the basis of > the U.S. input to ISO). > > Doing things legislatively appears to be sensible on its face. However, to > accomplish anything, you have to get the attention of the legislators, whose > primary motivation (with some notable exceptions) is to get re-elected. Any > bill, in the House or the Senate, has to have a substantial number of > sponsors in order to stand a chance of even being considered, let alone > passed. > > Metrication is not an election-time issue and, very likely, never will be. > We would need some kind of popular groundswell to make it an issue that > would resonate with a significant proportion of the population. > > If only Jimmy Carter had not sabotaged metrication (inadvertently), and if > only Ronald Reagan had not subdued it almost completely (deliberately), we > might not be having this discussion. > > (If you remember, Carter, in trying very na�vely to be fair, appointed both > supporters and opponents of metrication to the commission that was supposed > to implement it. Reagan, in his turn, defunded the commission.) > > We'll just have to keep chipping away, spreading the word and setting the > example. > > Bill Potts, CMS > Roseville, CA > http://metric1.org [SI Navigator] > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On > Behalf Of Ma Be > Sent: Tuesday, April 09, 2002 16:22 > To: U.S. Metric Association > Subject: [USMA:19360] Hey, a new idea! > > > Hello, folks, > > Please allow me to submit a new idea before you. This whole debate I and > Jim have been having on SI frameworking got me thinking. > > How about we focus our efforts on getting countries around the world to > yield authority on the issue of system of units to the "local" standards > bodies, which, evidently, in turn, would be subject to the highest > *international* authority on the issue, BIPM, for example (given that this > is a science issue and science has NO frontiers, issues of sovereignty > should not be a concern). In other words, when it comes to the use of units > of measurements, ALL stakeholders in the society should use what such > authoritative bodies would stipulate as "legal". > > This is actually similar to how it is, for instance, in my birthcountry, > Brazil. This could be a "backdoor" entrance to metrication in the US. > > That's how it would work. We would first get the equivalent BIPM arm in the > US to recognize ONLY SI units as having any legal status. Secondly we would > do legislativewise what is necessary to give such body full authority on > this. The argument for this implementation would be obvious. Since units > of measurements ARE the *unquestionable* domain of science, it would only > make sense to yield power and authority on this to those professionals in > this area. > > It's not like this would be a first or unheard of. We already do this for > things like safety, environment, etc. Therefore, why not extend this to > units of measurement? > > Comments anyone, please? Thanks for your feedback. > > Marcus > > > Is your boss reading your email? ....Probably > Keep your messages private by using Lycos Mail. > Sign up today at http://mail.lycos.com > >
