His Excellency Aethien wrote:
idiggory, King of Bards wrote:
It just works well. I can hear the temperature and know exactly how I feel about that.
That's a non argument though as it's purely reliant on what you're used to and I could use the exact same argument for Celcius.
I know instantly that, say 25°C is going to mean warm but not too hot and that -5°C means that half of the Netherlands is pitching a tent over the possibility of an Elfstedentocht
Except that Fahrenheit gives a clearer picture of temperatures than Celsius does with much less thinking.
Our temperature scale is more directly mapped to experience of temperatures. Negative temps, without ANY more thought, tell me it's going to be really frickin cold. Not much more matters. Bam, done, no more debating what to wear - it's "put on every single bit of clothing I own" weather. I don't need to think about numbers at all.
Because I'm not looking to think, I'm looking to glance at the weather and just make an intuitive choice about what works.
Sure, you'll adjust to ANY system. We could be using a system that just uses 10 degree ranges represented by various fruits and we'd all adjust to it.
But that doesn't mean it's not more intuitive to have a system that scales from, essentially, 0 to 100 that is more closely based on human experiences of temperatures rather than scientific meaning of those temps.
Because literally the only reason I care about the weather temperature is due to my experience of it.
Is it a huge deal either way? No. But our system IS more intuitive for weather. Celsius is essentially better for everything else (and for scientific discussions of temperatures), but when we're just talking about how hot/cold it is, the system that's more closely mapped to a linear progression of temp from "really ******* cold" to "really ******* hot" just makes more sense.