3 ms·

> What's a more convenient scale for human living conditions? 0–100 °F or -20–40 °C? I am aware people live in even colder and hotter environments, but the majo

> What's a more convenient scale for human living conditions? 0–100 °F or -20–40 °C? I am aware people live in even colder and hotter environments, but the majority of people in the world don't need to worry about values outside of this range. I also think "0 is very cold" and "100 is very hot" just makes more sense than "-20 is very cold" and "40 is very hot". The idea that 0-100F is somehow the range of “human living conditions” is completely bizarre to me, but I can see why someone from a place like the American Midwest might think this is true. To me 0C is so much more meaningful than 0F, especially when talking about weather. The difference between -1C and 1C is something you can literally see around you. The difference between -1F and 1F is not. Anything “below zero” is literally frozen and completely inhospitable to normal human life!

chungy 3y ago
> but I can see why someone from a place like the American Midwest might think this is true. Ironic since I don't live in the midwest. I've visited there during summer once. :) > The difference between -1C and 1C is something you can literally see around you. The difference between -1F and 1F is not. Anything “below zero” is literally frozen and completely inhospitable to normal human life! I dunno, down to 20°F/-7°C, it's pretty easy to have liquid water still when hit by direct sunlight. It's also not really that extremely cold (I'm still fine with short sleeve shirts in the 20s F). 0°F/-17°C is where I'd say things get extremely cold and even direct sunlight ceases to melt water.
- quicklime 3y ago
  I’m not claiming you live in the Midwest, just that the Midwest climate matches the Fahrenheit scale. I believe you when you say you feel that way at those temperatures, but I personally wouldn’t wear just a t-shirt when at any temperature under 10C/50F. So Fahrenheit matches the subjective temperature range where you might feel comfortable, but not me. And so you can’t make a general statement that it matches “human living conditions” when others think that Celsius better matches their comfortable range.

chungy 3y ago

> but I can see why someone from a place like the American Midwest might think this is true. Ironic since I don't live in the midwest. I've visited there during summer once. :) > The difference between -1C and 1C is something you can literally see around you. The difference between -1F and 1F is not. Anything “below zero” is literally frozen and completely inhospitable to normal human life! I dunno, down to 20°F/-7°C, it's pretty easy to have liquid water still when hit by direct sunlight. It's also not really that extremely cold (I'm still fine with short sleeve shirts in the 20s F). 0°F/-17°C is where I'd say things get extremely cold and even direct sunlight ceases to melt water.

quicklime 3y ago
I’m not claiming you live in the Midwest, just that the Midwest climate matches the Fahrenheit scale. I believe you when you say you feel that way at those temperatures, but I personally wouldn’t wear just a t-shirt when at any temperature under 10C/50F. So Fahrenheit matches the subjective temperature range where you might feel comfortable, but not me. And so you can’t make a general statement that it matches “human living conditions” when others think that Celsius better matches their comfortable range.