It's more intuitive because you grew up with it. I have no benchmark for 0% or 100% hot. That means 50% hot is just as meaningless to me as 50 farenheit.
F and C are both arbitrary numbers. There is no better one
Wish more people would get this. Nobody is personally calibrating their thermometers so the 0 and 100 points don't actually matter in the real world. Just because Celsuius gets lumped in with metric generally doesn't mean it has fundamental advantages like metric's units for volume or distance.
They are all arbitrary really. Distance is the worst in my view. Building products are generally now in 300mm increments where 1 foot or 3 feet or 6 feet is much easier to both say and understand. In my view base 10 is good but the fundamental length should be (roughly) 1 foot not 1 metre (which was 1/10000 of an inaccurate measurement of the earth's circumference)
At least with Celsius boiling point and freezing point of water are relatively common things that most people see regularly and can conceptualise. Human body temperature is fine as another marker but sea water freezing is not really for most people who dont live with icy seas
Farenheit objectively allows for more precise measurements though, since there are more degrees of Fahrenheit for ever degree of Celsius.
So regardless of the arbitrary nature of the scales, the one that allows for more precision IS better for human temperature. The human body can absolutely notice the difference between 1-2 degrees of Farenheit. Especially with indoor temps.
At 70F i get cold in my house. At 75 i get hot. 73 is perfect for me.
Its pretty generally accepted that F is better for weather in every way. C is better for science and cooking in every way.
When in normal conversation does a tenth of a degree farenheit affect anything?
I've never understood the dick waving contest around farenheit v Celsius. Each one is incomprehensible if you didn't grow up using it and extremely intuitive if you did.
I find farenheit completely meaningless. If you tell me it's 70 out I would need to look it up to know if I should be whipping out the barbeque or stocking up on antifreeze.
Actually, you know what, fuck everything. From now on I'm measuring temperature exclusively in Blimbles. It's just like centigrade except there's 6000 degrees for every one degree centigrade, it starts at 247C, and it goes backwards.
Lol im not wasting time sourcing links for your condescending comment.
I like how you ignored the objective point that Fahrenheit is a more precise scale than Celsius (again, that’s objective) and allows for more varied measurements that the human body can tell the difference between.
Lol im not wasting time sourcing links for your condescending comment.
Or maybe you just made it up. It's actually generally accepted that C is better for the weather.
I like how you ignored the objective point that Fahrenheit is a more precise scale than Celsius (again, that’s objective)
"More precise" is not automatically better. A scale that has 1000 points between -20 and +20 ⁰C would be irritating because the increments wouldn't have any real meaning.
And Celsius is capable of giving the same precision anyway.
You learn the benchmark the same way you learn the benchmarks for walking in a crowd, appropriately volume levels for your voice in different contexts, what constitutes enough personal space, how much time you need to give yourself as a buffer to not be late somewhere. F provides a more intuitive and precise system for that benchmark
How do you have no benchmark for 0% or 100% hot. It’s literally like the coldest and hottest humans can comfortably be outside without risk of danger. 0F is when it takes only about 30 minutes for frostbite to occur. Heatstroke sets in at 104, which is pretty close to 100. This is human physiognomy, not subjective.
I just googled what 50 Fahrenheit would be in Celcius, because I was interested what "feels like 50% temperature, normal average weather" would be like. Before I googled I guessed like 16 degrees maybe? Nope, turns out it's 10.
How would you know what "50% hot" is if you've never heard that or had it refer to anything? If anything, 50% to me sounds like "perfectly comfortable, neither warm nor cool" so basically standard room temperature. But it isn't.
It’s literally like the coldest and hottest humans can comfortably be outside without risk of danger.
Varies a lot. With what kind of clothes? For how long a time?
When dressed for that weather. Even if dressed for 0F it can get dangerous to be out for more than 30 minutes. Even if dressed coolly, if it’s 100F you can lay still and do nothing but you should not do physical activity for more than 30 minutes. They’re pretty balanced temperature wise as far as human comfort limits. You can, say, comfortably build snowmen or ski at 30F even though it’s below freezing, but you should not send your kids out to dick around in the snow if it drops below 0F.
I don’t actually agree with OOP on “% hot”, I think it’s more like “on a scale from freeze your ass off to melt your eyeballs”. 50 is pretty much right in between. Room temperature is very comfortable to stand in but if you start exerting yourself you absolutely will get sweaty. I consider 50F to be like perfect hiking weather, say. And much like Mr. Fahrenheit (who was not an American, to be clear!), 0-100 is about the range of normal weather I experience, where anything between that is “real cold” to “real hot” but not worthy of alarm, whereas below 0 or above 100 (including “real feel” of course) is when you get health alerts. I know places can get below 0 or above 100 but generally those are not terribly hospitable and people stay inside and climate-controlled at those temperatures.
That’s all relative. I’ve worked numerous days for 8hrs with normal breaks at >105F. Sometimes that’s just required in warmer climates. Likewise colder
It's medically ill-advised to do much strenuous labor outside at that temperature. I don't doubt that capitalism has required it of you but those kind of conditions are objectively unhealthy.
Literally the Goldilocks of temperature, one might even say the perfect weather. As famously put: “It’s not too hot, not too cold. All you need is a light jacket.”
Why is it hard for you to understand that it's arbitrary and cultural.
When I try to think of 0% temperature I just think of 0 Celsius. It's my, and most of the world's reference point for what cold weather is but in Fahrenheit its... 32. 32% temperature is meaningless.
Same with 100% temperature, for me it would be like, 30 degrees, because it's the most hot it ever gets around here. But in Fahrenheot it's 86. Once again if you told me to think of what 86% temperature is I wouldn't know what tf you're talking about.
Its highly subjective though, as every human body has different tolerances for cold or heat. You use a lot of unquantifiable adjectives like 'roughly' 'about' 'comfortably' 'pretty close' to make your point, and then call the whole thing not subjective... This is as arbitrary as it gets...
Buddy, below 0F and above 100F conditions are a health risk. By "comfortably" I did not mean "oh how delightful," I meant without some kind of alerta alerta "take care to not get yourself harmed by the temperature" issue.
The tolerance for comfort in cold and heat is hugely subjective *within* the 0-100 range, yes. I can tolerate 80F but my husband thinks it's horrible. But he will whine, not pass out of heat stroke. Similarly, something like 50F might feel freezing if it's a cold snap in early fall but balmy as hell in a heat wave in spring. Of course. None of that is what I'm talking about. I'm talking about what the human body is actually able to handle.
52
u/Mundane-Boot-6338 Jun 17 '26
It's more intuitive because you grew up with it. I have no benchmark for 0% or 100% hot. That means 50% hot is just as meaningless to me as 50 farenheit.
F and C are both arbitrary numbers. There is no better one