196

16509 readers

2322 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.

Rule: You must post before you leave.

^other^ ^rules^

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

664

rule (lemmy.cafe)

submitted 8 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

32 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 6 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

Ok hear me out. I've lived in the US and in Europe, and while Celsius makes sense for all sorts of things (cooking, car engines, PC temps...), I think Fahrenheit actually makes a surprising amount of sense for climate, indoor and outdoor.

While Celsius 0-100 is linked to the states of water, Fahrenheit is loosely a 0-100 on "how is this for a human to experience". 0°F is sorta the limit of "dang that's really cold" and 100°F is "dang that's really hot." And that's the whole reason we look at the weather report.

0-100°F also has more individual degrees than -18-38°C, and when a couple degrees can make a big difference for indoor comfort (or the heating bill), I appreciate more granularity.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 8 months ago

0-100°F also has more individual degrees than -18-38°C, and when a couple degrees can make a big difference for indoor comfort (or the heating bill), I appreciate more granularity.

Ah yes, because I've always found 16.5°C such a difficult concept. Decimal places are hard.

I concede the "human" scale could be handy to some, but I mean - the civilised world uses metres, not feet - why should it be any different with temperature?