Comments by "TheThirdMan" (@thethirdman225) on "Is The Metric System Actually Better?" video.

  1. This might be the best YouTube comments section ever.
    335
  2. I'm in Australia and I did the same thing. The only thing I retained in imperial was my height so my grandma would understand what I was talking about. She didn't get 1.91m.
    52
  3.  @chrisyukna8007  What a load of BS.
    24
  4.  @chrisyukna8007  You're just making excuses. Oh, I get it: nothing is easy and no system is perfect but until people stop pretending that there are things, like division, you can do in imperial you can't do in metric that are somehow a major selling point, you will remain this disastrous state of limbo.
    20
  5.  @chrisyukna8007  About 95% of the world's population uses metric. That, in itself, is a good enough reason so you're on the wrong track accusing me of claiming some kind of intellectual superiority.. Metric is the language of science and engineering and it makes little to no sense to spend so much time converting. It's also been shown time and time again to be a high risk proposition, costing an enormous amount of money and directly affecting trade. I stopped converting when I realised how pointless it was. That was about 1974.
    16
  6.  @chrisyukna8007  As far as your little historical anecdote is concerned, you sure sound like you're trying to justify Imperial over metric, despite your protestations to the contrary.
    15
  7.  @chrisyukna8007  How about you explain it.
    11
  8.  @Fenrick  Why should anyone listen to a simpleton who has never been outside of the United States? Ask any American who's been here. Ask Zac Efron why he moved here. Ask Matt Damon why he owns a holiday house here. Ask all those Americans who outstay their visas when they come here (Americans comprise the third-largest nationality of illegal immigrants in Australia).
    9
  9.  @fizaishaqwala7449  He lives in a world of denial, logical fallacies and false equivalents.
    8
  10.  @chrisyukna8007  The French lost wars against the British for any number of reasons, few of them related to technology. The battle of Agincourt was lost because while the French knights were the most fearsome troops on any battlefield, they chose to wade through a muddy field to attack the English. They had to dismount and walk, where upon they got stuck in the mud and stabbed in the nether regions while they flapped about on their backs like upturned turtles. Many of them drowned. The French had better rifles than the Prussians in 1870 but still lost that war. The French had better ships than the Royal Navy in the late 18th and early 19th centuries but the British spent more than double the amount of time at sea. Ergo, it wasn’t a matter of equipment but competence and how that equipment was used. Same applies to your cannon illustration. Sure, it was a cumbersome method of doing things but it was also not the fault of metric if that system was badly applied. As I said it’s about how it’s used / applied.
    7
  11.  @piadas804  The smart ones do.
    7
  12.  @chrisyukna8007  Not a non-sequiteur at all. Simply an observation that poor application of a particular system is not a reflection on the efficacy or otherwise of that system. Whether or not the French won doesn’t matter. That is a non-sequiteur.
    5
  13.  @chrisyukna8007  I have no idea what the second half of your comment meant, other than an illustration of an irrelevance.
    5
  14. Exactly. Converting only makes it harder and slower.
    5
  15.  @chrisyukna8007  Quaint. They don’t export those things. And once again, not the fault of any system if it’s badly applied or not applied at all.
    4
  16.  @chrisyukna8007  “Everybody does” is not a logical fallacy. It’s a simple fact. As for a compelling argument to do the same, it would sure be convenient.
    4
  17. Wait until they start talking about units of torque...one is ft lbs and the other is lb ft...
    3
  18.  @vishesh0512  Nope. https://www.enginelabs.com/news/torque-talk-pound-feet-foot-pounds-one/#:~:text=The%20“pound-foot”%20(,on%20a%20one%20foot%20lever.&text=The%20“foot-pound”%20(,force%20over%20a%20given%20distance.
    3
  19.  @chrisyukna8007  Yes, I did because I was pointing out that technical advantages or disadvantages are no guarantee of success. Once again, I remind you that these are examples of good systems badly applied and no inference can be drawn as to the efficacy of the system if it wasn’t used properly. You were talking about the need to convert English measurements into metric as a recipe for disaster based on the lack of standardisation and I am telling you that there is little connection between the value of the metric system and the way it was applied.
    2
  20.  @theRealSummonersUniverse1990  I strongly suggest you look into that. The very matter you raised - one of population density - is one of the major reasons Australia has not been successfully invaded. The US Navy will tell you that Australia is an extremely difficult proposition for anyone to invade.
    2
  21.  @madhoward  Well, you might be happy with two sets of spanners or sockets where one would do. Or you might be happy with SAE, BSW or other typed of threads where a standard metric thread would do. You might even be happy with buying your timber in imperial sizes and finding out they're not exactly the size you thought. Many people would not be happy with that. And speaking of timber sizes, I have seen many Americans complaining that the 3/4 inch plywood or MDF they bought wasn't exactly 3/4 inch. That's because it's 18mm. So, in fact, except for your scientists and engineers, you're being left behind. Many Americans are aware of this but some are not. There are only a handful of things which are still imperial in the rest of the world: wheel stud patterns, a person's height (so you can tell your grandma when she asks) and tossel size. ;)
    2
  22. angst film The British use it a lot less than America does.
    2
  23. The F-22 was the first major project in the United States build entirely in metric. So Americans can do metric when they want to.
    2
  24.  @chrisyukna8007  😂😂😂
    1
  25. No wonder the cartridges for the LEM didn't fit the sockets in the CM...
    1
  26.  @nobodynemoq  Is that why 1987 was cancelled?
    1
  27.  Oftin Wong  Did anyone turn up?
    1
  28. J077535 Can you buy metric tapes at Home Depot?
    1
  29.  @its1110  I’ve got a better idea: you keep you tossle out of it!
    1
  30. Malazag / Doge It’s a communist plot, isn’t it?
    1
  31. Fendoroid It is literally the only problem.
    1
  32. I doubt if many people outside the US even think about it.
    1
  33.  @conelord1984  What rubbish. Many of America’s showpiece projects are built in metric by companies using metric tooling. The F-22, for example, was built by hundreds of sub contractors using metric. And I mean 100% metric. Pratt & Whitney, the engine manufacturer, built the engine using metric and they would have had to re-tool to do it (no, they didn’t cheat and just use converted numbers). They had to use metric size bolts with metric threads. That’s just an example. And no, the rest of the world is not tuned to American tooling. It’s the worst part from a consumer point of view. You make some great tools but people like me don’t buy them because they are not metric or they put metric measurements in second place. Take a device which has a ruler on it. The American device will have imperial measurements on the upper edge and metric on the lower one. Who uses the lower one? Almost nobody. Americas unwillingness to move into at least the 20th century, much less the 21st, is costing a fortune in lost sales and time taken to make stupid and error riddled conversions.
    1
  34. The first minute and a half of this had me in stitches.
    1
  35. “Because imperial is a convoluted mess invented by people who married their cousins”. Too good!
    1
  36. Some of them probably measure it in AR-15s.
    1
  37.  @chrisyukna8007  Probably nowhere. The competition came from the Soviet Union which, ironically, used metric.
    1