> The best way to interpret Fahrenheit (for Celsius people) is to think of a scale from 0 to a 100 in terms of human comfort. I've heard this several times, bu

> The best way to interpret Fahrenheit (for Celsius people) is to think of a scale from 0 to a 100 in terms of human comfort. I've heard this several times, but I can tell you it really doesn't help me to get a good sense of Farenheit. My theory is Americans enjoy describing it this way (0 = really cold, 100 = really hot) because it seems pragmatic and humane, but it probably does little to help them get a feel for the scale. The main reason they have a good feel for the Farenheit scale is lots of experience with it, same as any other scale. Lots of internalised data points that create a frame of reference. We Brits like to think our scale is easy because 0 = melting ice, 100 = boiling water. But when I estimate the outdoor temperature as 25 C, I think my brain is really just linking that to past experiences of similar temperatures, the ice/boiling water thing doesn't come into it.