Comments

3 responses to “Unit testing :-)”

1. 2011/10/18

   Jerry Nicholls

   It’s the Daily Fail – what did you expect ? They are derisive of anything ‘science-y’ so why on earth would they stick with SI units, preferring to revert to some archaic measurement unit. I’m sure that the last time I looked they still did their (printed) weather in Fahrenheit rather than Celcius.

   As you can tell I’m no fan of that publication, and unfortunately my parents read it daily 🙁

   Reply
2. 2011/10/18

   Dave Walker

   Mmm, erroneous introduction of apparent precision by unit conversion; that’s a fun one! Hope a journalistically-trained reader is able to cite some well-known guidelines about this fallacy. Still, couldn’t help noticing that they didn’t convert “2 metres” into “6 feet” – there’s even inconsistency between their use of Imperial and SI units…

   Reply
3. 2011/10/18

   Simon

   Dave it is because the 6 foot tall ones only weigh over 6000 pounds, it is the 2 metre tall ones that weight over 6600 pounds. Do keep up. It is the extra .56167979 feet that makes the difference.

   Reply