On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 03:41:10 GMT, Gene Nygaard
wrote:
Do you think I'm that stupid, that you can pull the wool over
my eyes so easily?

Hi Gene,

As I pointed out earlier, your feelings belong at the end of the line
with the rest whose minds I cannot change.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 07:14:09 GMT, Richard Clark
wrote:

On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 03:41:10 GMT, Gene Nygaard
wrote:
Do you think I'm that stupid, that you can pull the wool over
my eyes so easily?

Hi Gene,

As I pointed out earlier, your feelings belong at the end of the line
with the rest whose minds I cannot change.

I proved you wrong, from the NIST site--your groundrules--and from
many other sources as well. I gave you a web page from NIST defining
the pound as a unit of mass exactly equal to 0.45359237 kg.

Now I have a challenge for you, Mr. Metrologist:

Show me an official definition of a pound force on the NIST pages.
Bet you can't do so. Note that a conditional definition, with a big
"if", indicating that this is only one possible acceptable definition,
is not sufficient--I want an official definition.

If you can't do that, try a broader problem: Show me an official
definition of a pound as a unit of force from ANY law of ANY country
in the world, or from ANY standard of ANY national or international
standards organization, or from ANY standard of ANY professional
organization.

Are you up to the challenge?

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

On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 18:21:49 GMT, Gene Nygaard
wrote:
Now I have a challenge for you, Mr. Metrologist:

Hi Gene,

What are your credentials? Can one expect you have at least a degree
in English? ;-)

If not, you will have to assemble at the end of the line with the
rest. Please leave room in front of you for those with serious
differences who might arrive later (almost guaranteed).

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 19:18:23 GMT, Richard Clark
wrote:

On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 18:21:49 GMT, Gene Nygaard
wrote:
Now I have a challenge for you, Mr. Metrologist:

Hi Gene,

What are your credentials? Can one expect you have at least a degree
in English? ;-)

My credentials won't change what you WON'T find on the NIST web pages,
wimp!

Show me the official definition of a pound as a unit of force from
NIST, either on their web pages or from any published document of NIST
or its predecessors.

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

On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 19:32:28 GMT, Gene Nygaard
wrote:
My credentials won't change what you WON'T find on the NIST web pages,
wimp!

Hi Gene,

OK no credentials. No proficiency in English and not even a CB? How
droll, that is indeed an amusing challenge from a middle aged farmer
who would challenge where the center of North America lies. I suppose
the doggerel of "a pint's a pound, the world round" bears more
directly on this slim side topic - but you don't offer credentials
into that. ;-)

You remain inseparable (through your own choice, but not view) from
any of 6 Billion who could as easily deny anything offered by me
through your simple random strokes at the keyboard for rebuff. Thus
fulfilling any -um- challenge is of equal magnitude in its
achievement.

"A learned gentleman who in the course of conversation
wished to inform us of this simple fact, that the counsel upon
the circuit at Shrewsbury were much bitten by fleas, took,
I suppose, seven or eight minutes in relating it circumstantially.
Johnson sat in great impatience till the gentleman had finished
his tedious narrative, and then burst out (playfully however),
'It is a pity, Sir, that you have not seen a lion; for a flea has
taken you such a time, that a lion must have served you for
a twelvemonth.'" "Boswell's Life of Johnson," pg. 407

Please leave plenty of room in front of you at the end of the line.
Those with credentials and important issues (and there are many,
metaphorical lions as it were instead of your fleas) will no doubt
(playfully however) slip in front of you in the future.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 19:18:23 GMT, Richard Clark
wrote:

On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 18:21:49 GMT, Gene Nygaard
wrote:
Now I have a challenge for you, Mr. Metrologist:

Hi Gene,

What are your credentials? Can one expect you have at least a degree
in English? ;-)

I am a wheat farmer who has already proved not only our resident
engineer/programmer and Capital-M Metrologist wrong, but our Chief
Peacekeeper Missileman Engineer as well. Isn't that enough for one
week?

Of course, from that job, I'm well aware of what a bushel is on the
Minneapolis Grain Exchange and other commodities markets, or at the
local grain elevator. It isn't a unit of volume at these places. And
while it is a certain number of pounds for each particular commodity,
it most certainly is not unit of force, either.

Not only did I prove Mr. Metrologist wrong, but I also proved that he
has no integrity. He won't even admit that I did so, even though I
followed his ground rules to a T, specifically citing a NIST web page
showing him to be wrong.

My degrees weren't in English, however--though I did enjoy some
English classes, and such a degree would have been quite relevant to
our discussion of linguistics earlier. What are your credentials in
linguistics? In the law, another primary subject matter of our
discussion? In history?

Now, find somebody on the NIST web pages with better credentials than
mine and yours to tell us what the official definition of a pound
force is. Still bet you can't do so.

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

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).

A historical lesson is brought to bear by the publisher of Newton's
Principia:
21 Nov. 1667
"I out and took coach and to Arundell house, where the meeting
of Gresham College was broke up; but there meeting Creed, I
with him to the tavern in St. Clements churchyard, where
was Deane Wilkins, Dr. Whistler, Dr. Floyd, a divine, admitted,
I perceive, this day, and other brave men. Among the rest, they
discourse of a man that is a little frantic (that hath been a kind
of minister, Dr, Wilkins saying that he hath read for him in his
church) that is poor and a debauched man, that the College have
hired for 20s. to have some of the blood of a Sheep let into his
body; and it is to be done Saturday next. They purpose to let in
about twelve ounces, which they compute is what will be let in in
a minutes time by a watch. They differ in the opinion they have
of the effects of it..."

30 Nov. 1667
"I was pleased to the see the person who had his blood taken
out. He speaks well, and did this day give the Society a relation
thereof in Latin, saying he finds himself much better since, and
as a new man. But he is cracked a little in his head, though he
speaks very reasonably and very well, He had but 20s. for his
suffering it, and is to have the same tried upon him..."

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.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

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

But he is cracked a little in his head, though he
speaks very reasonably and very well

Hi Gene,

Knowing you need references (a classic education would have exposed
this to you and it would have served no purpose to cite) Samuel Pepys.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

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/

On Sun, 28 Sep 2003 13:44:48 GMT, Gene Nygaard
wrote:
We've already heard the same lame excuse three times before.

Hi Gene,

So how deep do I have to plant it before it takes root? ;-)

Like this compulsive interest with your fleas, you have written a
Gregorian Mass that consists of only one note. To your advantage, if
you had transposed "Old MacDonald Had a Farm"; then the monotonic
rendition would at least give the appearance of CW. You are
dreadfully out of your element here.

Given the low intellectual bandwidth offered by your specious claims,
I can sit back and enjoy some stylistic variations to exercise my
fingers at the keyboard. I especially enjoy your barnyard epithets -
such a self fulfilling cliche inspires my anecdotes. Here's another
that a liberal education would have exposed you to (if only):

21 Nov. 1667
"On this occasion Dr. Whistler told a pretty story related
by Muffett, a good author, of Dr. Cayus that built Key's
College: that being very old and lived only at that time upon
woman's milk, he, while he fed upon the milk of a angry
fretful woman, was so himself; and then being advised to
take of a good natured woman, he did become so, beyond the
common temper of his age."

Oh, if you missed the citation to the quote above, that was again from
Samuel Pepys (same day in fact) who, although not trained in the
sciences, did learn to respect others of learning and accomplishment.
And by the way, that earlier quote:
Dr, Wilkins saying that he hath read for him in his
church) that is poor and a debauched man, that the College have
hired for 20s. to have some of the blood of a Sheep let into his
body
Contains a Pound reference you obviously missed (from the exchange
rate of 20 Shillings). Now, as every good Englishman would have
understood back then, this was a conversion. If he held 20 coins they
were NOT a Pound which is a single coin. There is an equivalency, but
this does not constitute an equality. Pepys could have written 1£
that is shorter, but he did not as it was obviously not what was
tendered to the debauched man. Even the debauched man would
understand the significance of weight v. mass and how equivalencies of
1pound = umpty-ump grams does not render the term pound as mass,
merely an antiquated variant much like 10000 swallows' tongues = 1KG.
Shirley you don't consider swallows' tongues as units of mass? Cow
tongues (Neat's tongue to the English) perhaps. And this leads us
back to the good Dr. Cayus' condition - perhaps you should change your
diet.

The folks at the end of the line are beginning to complain - could you
move back some more?

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC