Well, at least the measurements were taken in metres and the feet are just
translation.  Which means it should be easy to see the hidden metric in the
numbers.

Euric


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jason Darfus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, 2004-06-07 15:35
Subject: [USMA:30077] "Shooting for the Sky"


> The response from the journalist who reported on this story:
>
> Hmm.. so it looks like the students did in fact record their results in
feet... *sigh*
>
> -----Forwarded Message-----
> From: "Pemberton-Butler, Lisa"
> Sent: Jun 7, 2004 1:58 PM
> To: Jason Darfus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: RE: "Shooting for the Sky"
>
> Hi Jason,
> They used altimeters (sp?), but then converted the measurements back to
feet, as part of the project.
> Thanks for your comments.
> It was a fun event to watch.
> Lisa
>
>  -----Original Message-----
> From: Jason Darfus
> Sent: Monday, June 07, 2004 8:12 AM
> To: Pemberton-Butler, Lisa
> Subject: Re: "Shooting for the Sky"
>
> Dear Ms. Pemberton,
> I found your article titled "Shooting for the Sky" through a Google News
> search with the term "metric system".  It was good to read that the 8th
grade
> students are learning to use SI (International System of units) in their
> project, however your reporting of the altitudes reached in units of feet
is
> of concern.  Did the students determine the altitudes in "feet" or did you
> make the conversion for the story you reported?  I sincerely hope the
> students actually measured attained altitudes in meters and not feet
> otherwise it's self-defeating.
> I really wish reporters all across the country would begin using SI terms
in
> their stories so as to familiarize the general public with their usage.  I
> doubt there will be a "directive" from the Federal Government demanding
> people switch to exclusive use of SI so it's up to the individuals to take
it
> upon themselves and decide to start the conversion at the grass-roots
level.
> Until folks can overcome the inertia and initial embarrassment of talking
SI
> in everyday life, conversion will continue to take 'forever'.
>
> 81.4 m is pretty impressive for a pop bottle rocket :-)
>
> Sincerely
> Jason Darfus
> Columbus, OH
>
>

Reply via email to