On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 22:20:17 GMT, Richard Clark
wrote:

On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 20:45:27 GMT, Gene Nygaard
wrote:
Not only did I prove Mr. Metrologist wrong, but I also proved that he
has no integrity.

Hi Gene,

And yet this does not seem to satisfy you. ;-)

No doubt this is product of an insecure basis in logic that is more
heartfelt than intuitive (despite the cut-and-paste philosophies).
snip

As I offered elsewhere; there are many in my fan club who's minds I
cannot change. For such trivial matters as yours, I am afraid you
have to go to the end of that line, and leave room for others of
substance ahead of you.

We've already heard the same lame excuse three times before.

Translation (from the point of view of Mr. Metrologist, aka R. Clark):

I already wasted three hours searching through the NIST web site for a
definition of a pound, and I couldn't find one either as a unit of
force or as a unit of mass. So I didn't figure that some
whippersnapper who just popped into this thread would be able to find
any official definition of the pound as a unit of mass there.

Okay, so he proved me wrong about pounds as units of mass. But I'll
be damned if he's going to get me admit that there isn't any official
definition of a pound force on NIST's pages.

end of translation

There, I told them anyway. BTW, though I can't find an "official"
definition of a pound force on NIST's pages, I can find a conditional
one, with a big "if" indicating fairly clearly that the pound force
has never been officially defined. Can anyone else even find that
one?

Gene Nygaard
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/Gene_Nygaard/