No, what the grunt brain was thinking was, "7 meters and 70 centimeters" (for a length of 7.7 m) because he was thinking like "25 feet and 4 inches".
Carleton From: owner-u...@colostate.edu [mailto:owner-u...@colostate.edu] On Behalf Of Martin Vlietstra Sent: Monday, January 10, 2011 14:00 To: U.S. Metric Association Subject: [USMA:49459] RE: Floods in Germany -- AP Reporting A pity that AP cant do their times table either - when I went to school, 7 metres equaled 700 centimetres, not 70! _____ From: owner-u...@colostate.edu [mailto:owner-u...@colostate.edu] On Behalf Of John M. Steele Sent: 10 January 2011 17:02 To: U.S. Metric Association Subject: [USMA:49457] Floods in Germany -- AP Reporting Germany is experiencing river flooding from a quick thaw and heavy snow melt. AP and the Washington Post do a typically terrible summary of the water level: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/01/10/AR2011011000 658.html Officials were watching flood levels on the Rhine river in the city of Koblenz on Monday that were expected to peak at 25 feet, 4 inches (7 meters, 70 centimeters), and some low-lying parts of the city were under water. The BBC does better: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-12149935 Some low-lying areas of Koblenz are already under water and officials expect the waters to reach 7.7m (25ft) on Monday afternoon. The normal level is around 2.4m, reports say. A German news source (English service) describes the water level in another town as 8.19 m, so they apparently work to the nearest centimeter. AP, you have a few things wrong: 1) Since Germany is metric and obviously the source of the data, shouldn't the metric come first? 2) Metric doesn't use mixed units, 7 m, 70 cm is wrong. Use 7.7 m or 770 cm. 3) Assuming 7.70 m, 25 ft 4in is wrong. It rounds to 25 ft 3in, "about 25 feet" is better yet
