Those **** data. I hate them.

Unlike the laws of science, the laws of language are often subject to the will of the people. And while we cannot change carefully tested scientific truths to fit the fashion, grammarian's rules, when they no longer serve clarity or naturalness of expression, we can throw out the window.

Curiously, scientific writing often contains a mixture of wild experimentation with language and strict adherence to aging rules of usage. New words are often coined recklessly by compounding ordinary words or fragments into technical monsters or awkward hybrids. (A paper was once written about "geochronobioclimatopaleomagnetostratigraphy".) But one rule of usage is dear to every technical writer; it concerns the use of the word data.

Did you know that it is correct to say "The data have reached my desk," and "The data are conclusive," but wrong to say "The data has...," "The data is..."? A Latin word, data is the plural form of datum and therefore requires a plural verb.

Nevertheless, many people feel the word has been Americanized, that it now refers to a collective unit, and takes a singular verb. In fact, of the 136 distinguished consultants on usage polled for the 1975 Harper Dictionary of Contemporary Usage, 49% responded that they use "The data is..." in writing. And in casual speech, 65% use data as singular. Those who defend "The data is..." often point to the fact that agenda is also, strictly, a plural, but is nearly always regarded as a single list and takes a singular verb. You'll probably never hear anyone ask: "Are the agenda interesting?

Still, science is a special case; the international transfer of information is vital. Nearly every technical paper will be read by people for whom English is not the primary language, and communication is not served by constant experimentation.

So, on the issue of data in modern American usage, you might say "The data is mixed". But as for consistency in scientific writing, the data are strongly behind it.

Those **** data. I hate them.

The National Geodetic Survey (NGS) defines a geodetic datum as: 1. "A set of constants used for calculating the coordinates of points on the Earth." Generally a datum is a reference from which measurements are made. In surveying and geodesy, a datum is a reference point on the earth's surface against which position measurements are made, and an associated model of the shape of the earth for computing positions. Horizontal datums are used for describing a point on the earth's surface, in latitude and longitude. Vertical datums are used to measure elevations or underwater depths.

North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD 88)
A fixed reference for elevations determined by geodetic leveling. The datum was derived from a general adjustment of the first-order terrestrial leveling nets of the United States, Canada, and Mexico. In the adjustment, only the height of the primary tidal bench mark, referenced to the International Great Lakes Datum of 1985 (IGLD 85) local mean sea level height value, at Father Point, Rimouski, Quebec, Canada was held fixed, thus providing minimum constraint. NAVD 88 and IGLD 85 are identical. However, NAVD 88 bench mark values are given in Helmert orthometric height units while IGLD 85 values are in dynamic heights. See International Great Lakes Datum of 1985, National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929, and geopotential difference. NAVD 88 should not be used as Mean Sea Level.

A "datum" is a "set of constants" derived from "terrestrial leveling nets"? Yeah...

I use "data is" and I don't apologize for doing so.

"Data are" is very distracting and only Indian people talk that way who learned English from a book.

You are what is wrong with America.

That use isn't unique to America though.

Some UK Universities, and organizitions such as the IEEE Computer Society accepts the use of data as a singular mass noun, much like the word "information."

Isn't Data that gay robot that's always making out with C-3PO?