5 ms·

One pet peeve of mine with climate change articles is that in the US Celsius is often used. A&W tried introducing a 1/3 lb burger, and it failed horribly becau

One pet peeve of mine with climate change articles is that in the US Celsius is often used. A&W tried introducing a 1/3 lb burger, and it failed horribly because the average consumer couldn't understand that 1/3 is greater than 1/4. Now with climate change, that same person is going to shrug off 2.7C because "2.7 isn't much". Re-frame that as 5-10F, and that person is suddenly going to be much more interested, because a 5-10F increase in summer temperatures anywhere in the US is meaningful.

anamexis 5y ago
I don't think the global mean temperature change is going to come off as particularly impactful either way. 5-10°F increase is notable, but doesn't sound particularly scary or urgent. It's the catastrophic consequences that are the scary part.
- hesdeadjim 5y ago
  Yep I won't disagree that the actual consequences are far more severe than turning up the A/C and not going outside. Depending where you live though, adding 5-10°F isn't entirely ignorable. If you live in Texas, that's taking a 100°F day and making it sound even more brutal. Or as a Coloradan, it's experiencing temperatures you never thought you'd see in the mountains, and being able to intuitively associate the increase in temperatures with the increase of wildfires.
- woodruffw 5y ago
  A 10 degree increase in the average summer temperature would probably mean tens of thousands of deaths per day in less developed countries with humid climates. The human body doesn’t tolerate wet-bulb temperatures above 95F.
  - anamexis 5y ago
    I'm not disagreeing. But just citing the global mean temperature rise does not convey those kinds of horrific consequences.
    - woodruffw 5y ago
      Okay. Here’s an article that conveys them more directly[1]. [1]: https://www.theguardian.com/science/2021/mar/08/global-heating-tropical-regions-human-livability https://www.theguardian.com/science/2021/mar/08/global-heati...
- mkr-hn 5y ago
  Ten degrees is the difference between manageable and deadly with enough humidity. It's meaningful if you live in a place where it's meaningful.
WastingMyTime89 5y ago
> the average consumer couldn't understand that 1/3 is greater than 1/4. The average reader of France 24 understands Celsius and has no clue what a Fahrenheit is. No one uses Fahrenheit apart from the US. It's like imperial units, totally irrelevant if you are addressing a global audience.
- themodelplumber 5y ago
  F does have that nice comfort-zone granularity though. Swingier whole numbers around the zone of human activity. Maybe there's a way in which the numbers could be displayed side by side... Even for sheer generic number effects
  - Zababa 5y ago
    I think that's mostly because you're used to it. I know that 18-22 °C is comfortable because that's how it is, but that's just out of habit.
  - kergonath 5y ago
    A 1°C difference is about 2°F. Not that much more granularity and in practice we just round to the nearest °C and it gives a pretty good idea. It’s like inches and pounds: purely a matter of habit. OTOH, using °C makes much more sense for other reasons.
- hesdeadjim 5y ago
  You're missing my point completely. If a news article is targeted at a US resident, it should use Fahrenheit for maximum impact. Globally and scientifically, of course use Celsius -- or even better, mention both.
  - HappyTypist 5y ago
    This article isn't targeted at a US residents, but your comment seems to imply it should use Fahrenheit.
josephcsible 5y ago
How did you turn 2.7C into 5-10F, when 2.7C is less than 5F?
- hesdeadjim 5y ago
  Sorry I was off by 0.14°F. I'll make sure to be extra precise next time so that you can understand the point.
  - josephcsible 5y ago
    I was more upset about the "10" than the "5". My point was that you "converted" a single value to a range, giving the impression that the single value would be roughly in the middle of the range, but it was actually below its lower bound. Why didn't you say just "5F", or if you wanted to give a range, then "3-7F" instead?
    - hesdeadjim 5y ago
      To make a point. In this day and age, for the worse, news is sales. You want average people to pay attention, give them something they can't help but click on because it sounds scary. This site is a different kind of echo chamber, in that precision, nuance, and actual science tends to be rewarded with upvotes. If you fit in that category, you are multiple standard deviations above the mean news reader/watcher.
      - zdragnar 5y ago
        > You want average people to pay attention, give them something they can't help but click on because it sounds scary. And then they completely ignore you or think the entire thing is a lie because you lied about the details. Pretty much every denial of anthrogenic climate change boils down to pointing out hyped up, exaggerated worst-case scenarios peddled in the media that didn't come to pass, even if the underlying data and original conclusions were accurate.
        5y ago
sylvainr65 5y ago
> A&W tried introducing a 1/3 lb burger, and it failed horribly because the average consumer couldn't understand that 1/3 is greater than 1/4. Why then they didn't come up with a 1/5 lb burger?

anamexis 5y ago

I don't think the global mean temperature change is going to come off as particularly impactful either way. 5-10°F increase is notable, but doesn't sound particularly scary or urgent. It's the catastrophic consequences that are the scary part.

hesdeadjim 5y ago
Yep I won't disagree that the actual consequences are far more severe than turning up the A/C and not going outside. Depending where you live though, adding 5-10°F isn't entirely ignorable. If you live in Texas, that's taking a 100°F day and making it sound even more brutal. Or as a Coloradan, it's experiencing temperatures you never thought you'd see in the mountains, and being able to intuitively associate the increase in temperatures with the increase of wildfires.
woodruffw 5y ago
A 10 degree increase in the average summer temperature would probably mean tens of thousands of deaths per day in less developed countries with humid climates. The human body doesn’t tolerate wet-bulb temperatures above 95F.
- anamexis 5y ago
  I'm not disagreeing. But just citing the global mean temperature rise does not convey those kinds of horrific consequences.
  - woodruffw 5y ago
    Okay. Here’s an article that conveys them more directly[1]. [1]: https://www.theguardian.com/science/2021/mar/08/global-heating-tropical-regions-human-livability https://www.theguardian.com/science/2021/mar/08/global-heati...
mkr-hn 5y ago
Ten degrees is the difference between manageable and deadly with enough humidity. It's meaningful if you live in a place where it's meaningful.

WastingMyTime89 5y ago

> the average consumer couldn't understand that 1/3 is greater than 1/4. The average reader of France 24 understands Celsius and has no clue what a Fahrenheit is. No one uses Fahrenheit apart from the US. It's like imperial units, totally irrelevant if you are addressing a global audience.

themodelplumber 5y ago
F does have that nice comfort-zone granularity though. Swingier whole numbers around the zone of human activity. Maybe there's a way in which the numbers could be displayed side by side... Even for sheer generic number effects
- Zababa 5y ago
  I think that's mostly because you're used to it. I know that 18-22 °C is comfortable because that's how it is, but that's just out of habit.
- kergonath 5y ago
  A 1°C difference is about 2°F. Not that much more granularity and in practice we just round to the nearest °C and it gives a pretty good idea. It’s like inches and pounds: purely a matter of habit. OTOH, using °C makes much more sense for other reasons.
hesdeadjim 5y ago
You're missing my point completely. If a news article is targeted at a US resident, it should use Fahrenheit for maximum impact. Globally and scientifically, of course use Celsius -- or even better, mention both.
- HappyTypist 5y ago
  This article isn't targeted at a US residents, but your comment seems to imply it should use Fahrenheit.

josephcsible 5y ago

How did you turn 2.7C into 5-10F, when 2.7C is less than 5F?

hesdeadjim 5y ago
Sorry I was off by 0.14°F. I'll make sure to be extra precise next time so that you can understand the point.
- josephcsible 5y ago
  I was more upset about the "10" than the "5". My point was that you "converted" a single value to a range, giving the impression that the single value would be roughly in the middle of the range, but it was actually below its lower bound. Why didn't you say just "5F", or if you wanted to give a range, then "3-7F" instead?
  - hesdeadjim 5y ago
    To make a point. In this day and age, for the worse, news is sales. You want average people to pay attention, give them something they can't help but click on because it sounds scary. This site is a different kind of echo chamber, in that precision, nuance, and actual science tends to be rewarded with upvotes. If you fit in that category, you are multiple standard deviations above the mean news reader/watcher.
    - zdragnar 5y ago
      > You want average people to pay attention, give them something they can't help but click on because it sounds scary. And then they completely ignore you or think the entire thing is a lie because you lied about the details. Pretty much every denial of anthrogenic climate change boils down to pointing out hyped up, exaggerated worst-case scenarios peddled in the media that didn't come to pass, even if the underlying data and original conclusions were accurate.
      - 5y ago

sylvainr65 5y ago

> A&W tried introducing a 1/3 lb burger, and it failed horribly because the average consumer couldn't understand that 1/3 is greater than 1/4. Why then they didn't come up with a 1/5 lb burger?