3 ms·

No, its not logical because we don't spend most our time doing science experiments. We do spend most of our time fighting the elements to survive. If you are

No, its not logical because we don't spend most our time doing science experiments. We do spend most of our time fighting the elements to survive. If you are confined to a hemisphere at average latitude you will see 95 percentiles between 0 and 100F (i.e. we fix the endpoints to human sensory perception thats why 50F is not some unimaginable value) and if you are outside those values then beware. That is a much more useful scale for 99.9% of humans outside of science. If you are in science/engineering and fuck up the conversion then probably you should get out of science/engineering.

katbyte 3y ago
I’m pretty sure fighting the elements to survive includes knowing when and how close one is to water freezing, and water boiling. So I’ve yet to hear a good argument for why Fahrenheit is better here, it does not really “relate to humans”. Humans regularly sense, encounter, and use temperatures above 100F so that is not the “endpoint of human sensory perceptions” and in the northern areas going before 0F is common. Not to mention you fridges freezer likely goes below 0F and again you sure can feel the difference between -10c and -20c
- peteradio 3y ago
  You've already lost the point if you are talking about interaction with human instruments like freezers. The point is about percentiles of typical weather experience. If you are getting scalded by boiling water I doubt a thermometer on the centigrade would have saved ya.
  - katbyte 3y ago
    you are the one making claims like "the 0F to 100F scale matches human senses" not me. I am only pointing out that on both sides of the scale it is exceeded. Now you are moving the goal post to limit it to weather? every walk on hot sand or rock thats been in the sun all day. so air temperature? where that also doesn't match the natural weather in places all over the globe. so whats next "it matches the typical weather experience of these states in the US therefore its.. better" ? because many states will experience -F and over 100F. gotta say i do find the mental gymnastics used to defend F pretty funny

katbyte 3y ago

I’m pretty sure fighting the elements to survive includes knowing when and how close one is to water freezing, and water boiling. So I’ve yet to hear a good argument for why Fahrenheit is better here, it does not really “relate to humans”. Humans regularly sense, encounter, and use temperatures above 100F so that is not the “endpoint of human sensory perceptions” and in the northern areas going before 0F is common. Not to mention you fridges freezer likely goes below 0F and again you sure can feel the difference between -10c and -20c

peteradio 3y ago
You've already lost the point if you are talking about interaction with human instruments like freezers. The point is about percentiles of typical weather experience. If you are getting scalded by boiling water I doubt a thermometer on the centigrade would have saved ya.
- katbyte 3y ago
  you are the one making claims like "the 0F to 100F scale matches human senses" not me. I am only pointing out that on both sides of the scale it is exceeded. Now you are moving the goal post to limit it to weather? every walk on hot sand or rock thats been in the sun all day. so air temperature? where that also doesn't match the natural weather in places all over the globe. so whats next "it matches the typical weather experience of these states in the US therefore its.. better" ? because many states will experience -F and over 100F. gotta say i do find the mental gymnastics used to defend F pretty funny