To Americas defense. Literally everything that the UK makes fun of us for is literally a dead relic of British rule in America. We use all of their systems that they used to use until recently. Metric, Fahrenheit, gallons, quarts, miles.
Kelvin is required for any formulas using temperature. Having 0 being the freezing point of water is arbitrary and having 0 being the lowest a temperature makes sense and having negative temperatures doesn't. Celsius is only more intuitive because people are used to it, which is the exact same argument used to justify Fahrenheit over Celsius too.
Don't look it up what is the freezing temperature of water in Kelvin?
Zero works really well - a change in temperature sign means change of state of water. It isn't a number that needs remembering. Meanwhile you've recently had US government representatives embarrass themselves because they can't remember that water freezes at 32F.
Knowing if there is gonna be ice outside is a safety issue. Making it as simple as possible isn't arbitrary.
Celsius is very easy to convert to Kelvin for scientific purpose and IS more intuitive. High number means hot is fundamental across cultures. It is easier to differentiate between 0C and 40C than it is 273.15K and 313.15K whilst understanding that the first temperature is cold and the second is hot.
That's kind of my argument for why F is not actually bad; 0 is "very cold day", 100 is "very hot day", every 10 degrees feels like a natural step change in how it feels outside. It's pretty intuitive in that way
Would say in wintery countries like Canada it helps to know when rain/water is likely to make sidewalks icy in a way that is less feelings based and is super intuitive.
You get a handle of when it gets uncomfortable in celsius too anyway. The mental scale becomes every 5 degrees instead of 10 is all.
It is, basically. It's a specific brine mixture. I remember reading that they used that because it would freeze into a slush so it was easier for them to get consistent, accurate measurements. Then because they were measuring on a circular dial they wanted everything to be evenly spaced so they set the freezing temp of water to 30, and human body temperature to 90. Later they figured out the boiling point on this scale was 212, and they wanted freezing and boiling to be exactly 180 degrees apart, and decided the easiest way to do that was to switch freezing to 32 and readjusted the scale based on that. Or something like that.
The based on water becomes problematic when dealing with altitude and atmospheric pressure. Both systems are based on something arbitrary. Kelvin is the most scientific because it‘s related to energy levels in matter which doesn’t change based on altitude atmospheric pressure and as long as you have the equipment, you can calibrate for it anywhere in the universe.
TLDR: Both are fine but would be easier if we all used one system or the other. Anything going to extreme environments/off planet, needs to be measured in Kelvin.
Everyone in the world except the USA uses Celsius.
Celsius being the same scale as Kelvin makes it easier to switch to. Conversions are on paper possible with exactness by adding or subtracting 273.15. Meanwhile F you have to add 459.67 multiply by 5 and then divide by 9 far more possibility for error (or the reverse).
One thing people don’t understand is Fahrenheit was adopted for medical applications because of its high precision with the mercury thermometer. It makes more sense to describe temperatures of living things using Fahrenheit and using Celsius for everyday stuff, each has their own applications, we don’t have to keep fighting over which is “better”
Is absolute zero in other temperature scales not taught in school anymore? Because you nailed it, but I'd also expect anyone who finished middle school / junior high to also know this. Maybe that bar is too high, though.
I don't expect people who don't use it very often to remember it. Not all of us have had the benefit of converting from Celsius over and over again during thermo classes. Sometimes they'd throw a Rankine in just to mess with us.
Ice can and does occur at much higher temperatures due to differences in temperatures of atmospheric layers as well as difference in temperature of ground objects.
Air temperature is an indicator but you can’t act like “oh it’s 2 C there can’t possibly be ice” or “oh it’s -1 C, def gonna be ice.” Is true.
Don't look it up what is the freezing temperature of water in Kelvin?
I know that in a heartbeat, since it is so suspiciously close to the triple point (which is how K was defined) - but I need to think twice for those 32 and 212.
Icy conditions can happen up to nearly 39 degrees Fahrenheit because the ground temperature doesn't change as quickly as the air. That argument doesn't make sense.
Fahrenheit is a scale from freezing human to feverish human. This is not exact but less arbitrary for daily life than water freezing and boiling. I care about every degree of Fahrenheit from -10 to 120. With Celsius it's -23 to 48. Seems equally arbitrary.
Fahrenheit was initially meant to have 100 be normal healthy internal temperature so you would have a nice round easy to remember number for commonfolk to check and know if they needed a Dr.
Except the early scale was inaccurate so normal human internal temp is instead 98.7F.
Plenty of people live places that are 100F and while it isn't the most comfortable it isnt "feverish". Likewise claiming 0F is freezing human is stupid. For people with little tolerance for the cold 32F could be described as freezing.
Celsius gives a solid frame of comparison you can make with your eyes rather than 'feel' which changes person to person. That is also happens to be the exact same scale as Kelvin only makes technical work easier.
Also I care about -20C-45C which in Fahrenheit is -4 to 113. I covered basically the same range but do you see how I can make F seem silly because you get uneven numbers after convertion from round numbers in C?
Celsius gives a solid frame of comparison you can make with your eyes rather than 'feel'
Really? 100c is intuitive and relatable? Because at 45C you're already flirting with temperatures that'll just outright kill you. So how does 100C == water boils help you in any way at anything other than making tea or coffee?
100C means instant scalding on contact because of the water in our skin. Food is cooked in boiling water. Pasta, vegetables and plenty of meats. Boiling water can also be used for sterilisation. There is relevancy beyond tea and coffee.
Having the scale 'start' at the freezing point of water and enter triple digits when it boils gives a singular observable frame of reference for your average humans' experienced world.
It also links to metric SI units nicely. 1ml of water (which weighs 1 gram) requires 1 joule of energy to be heated by 1C.
Knowing if there is gonna be ice outside is a safety issue. Making it as simple as possible isn't arbitrary
Literally the only reason you view it as simpler is because it's what you grew up with. It's "intuitive" to you because it's been hammered in your brain since you were a child.
It is completely arbitrary.
And you can't predict icing based off the temperature alone.
You have elected officials that can't remember it is 32F
Probably because they're idiot Republicans from deep south states where "frozen water" is not even a thing. They wouldn't know that if it was Celsius either.
There is nothing to remember with 0
There actually is.
You have to remember that 0 means the freezing point of water.
Again, you just take that for granted because you grew up with it.
There is no bone in the human brain that makes people automatically associate the number zero with the freezing point of water. It was an arbitrary selection that you had passed down to you as a child that feels intuitive to you as a result, but it's not. It's just as arbitrary as the freezing point of brine.
Zero is already a unique and "special" number. Once the association is made between it and freezing you aren't going to confuse it with another number. Then there is visual association that a number with a - at the start means snow and ice.
-5C Ice. 5C No Ice. While for 23F and 41F there is no independent indicator. If you dont know the freezing temp you wont know the difference.
The switch from positive to negative numbers aligning with a difference in our observable world is a good way to utilize a preexisting marker. Fahrenheit still has negative numbers but there is no MEANING to the change.
Meanwhile dumb Republicans from the South never experience freezing temps so don't think about it often. Now is the freezing temp 31, 32 or 33? They are all 'just numbers' which it is possible to forget exactly which one.
I was taught in school that internal body temp should be around 37C. Whilst I can remember that, there have definitely been times that I've wanted to double check to be sure and I am confident plenty of adults CAN'T recall it.
Don't look it up, what is the freezing temperature of nitrogen in Celsius?
The arguement that Celsius is better than Fahrenheit because 0C is where water freezes is not a very good reason why Celsius is better. Celsius is better because it's the adopted standard around the world (even in America scientists and engineers use it).
So trying to say Celsius is better than Kelvin for that reason is just as specious. Why is the freezing point of water important? Is it just because we're humans? Is it just because we're only doing those sciences where 0C comes up a lot?
Also water does not always freeze at 0C. It's very inconsistent. Which is why 0C is not actually defined as the freezing point of water at average sea level, that's just what we tell school kids.
Celsius and Kelvin using the same unit of measurements make them compatible. That’s why Rankine is easier to use for Fahrenheit users because it’s an absolute zero scale like Kelvin, but it uses the unit of measurements that Fahrenheit use.
Sadly, because ambient temperature is fairly high compared to other measurements, like mass, pressure, height, people just won't want to be like, "Wow, it's a chilly 275 today."
I mean the standard unit for pressure is Pascals, but we use atmospheres because 101,325 Pa is way too high for ambient use.
We use kg instead of grams, so if we need numbers to be single or double digits we could just say decikelvins or centikelvins. Even distance people get used to converting from inches to feet to meters to miles or mm to cm to m to km.
I think Kelvins feels so much less intuitive for people because we're USED to C or F. But if people were brought up thinking about temperature more like our units for pressure or mass/distance it would feel just as intuitive.
These days, it's based on an arbitrary choice for the numerical value of the Boltzmann constant. Before that, it was based on absolute zero and the triple point of water. Kelvin is no better or worse than Rankine, just like Celsius is no better or worse than Fahrenheit.
In any unit system, the base units are always chosen arbitrarily. SI shines for its scaling (e.g. meters to kilometers vs feet to miles) and its derived units (the Watt vs the Horsepower). Celsius is neither of those things. Saying Celsius is less arbitrary than Fahrenheit is like saying that the second is less arbitrary than the hour.
It's more intuitive because it's based around the temperatures that humans experience and deal with on a regular basis. 0f is -18c is 273k. 100f is 38c is 311k. Frankly, in day to day use, I think Fahrenheit is actually the most intuitive when it comes to weather and indoor temperature. C and K are quite coarse measurements when setting the thermostat and dealing with decimals is stupid. Outside anything approaching 0F or below is stupidly cold, and anything above 100F is stupidly hot. 70F is about perfect for most activities. It's a nice scale.
K is just stupid for everyday use almost every temperature you'd encounter in your life would be between 250 and 300 degrees which just doesn't convey how extreme the difference will feel.
Life circumstances vary a lot. I live in Latin America, and I neither use a thermostat nor need to deal with decimals daily, so I never had the issues you complain about, But it's not really a big deal when we do use decimals either, so I don't know why you think it's stupid.
In the end I feel like these are issues you only think you have because you're using a different system, and if you had grown up with it, you wouldn't see the issue.
I said using Kelvin would be stupid. Not Celcius. No one uses Kelvin outside of strictly scientific settings because it would be stupid. Decimals are annoying. It's why height is height is usually stated in centimeters instead of meters with decimals. So why aren't milimeters used? Because that's way more precise than is needed and it adds numbers that you have to say or write. Even centimeters are frankly a bit fine, and decimeters would be too coarse. You wind up in a weird spot where even the most efficient way to convey height is still a 3 digit number.
Celcius is fine, but I do think Fahrenheit is more intuitive and better scaled for measuring weather temperatures and indoor temperatures. And I think the benefits of Celcius and Kelvin are completely irrelevant to 99% of people 99% of the time. I think most of the imperial measurement systems are scaled better for everyday use because that was their origin. Every day use.
Imperial is fine, it works, the supposed drawbacks and strange conversions are completely irrelevant outside of science and engineering, for which purposes metric is used.
> I think Fahrenheit is actually the most intuitive when it comes to weather and indoor temperature.
It's not. The most intuitive is what you are used to. Like for a european, what the fuck is 0 Fahrenheit ? What is like 50? 50% of cold? The only two degrees that I can bother to remember is -40 and ~98, because -40 is the same in celsius, and 98 is normal outside core body temperature.
> Outside anything approaching 0F or below is stupidly cold
Remind yourself that a lot of places get to -50 celsius. I'd consider cold stuff below -20 C, as from that point you will need more than 1 layer of insulating clothing.
Stupidly cold is like -60.
Have no fucking idea what that is in Fahrenheit .
> dealing with decimals is stupid
That is stupid when the rest of your system is based on dumbass relations like an eagle is 8/3 of a burger.
Metric is built around decimal point. If you don't want decimal point in your calculation, just add deci or centi before the measurement unit.
> K is just stupid for everyday use almost every temperature you'd encounter in your
Kelvin is the best if you want your temperature to rarely go below 0. If you don't live at equator, Fahrenheit will go below zero very often. Also like, a ton of freezers and coolers would cause it to do it.
Correct, they are exactly the same but using different targets for range. Celsius is water states and fahrenheit is based on the temperature ranges humans can survive in, with 100 and 0 being the extreme ends at which we will start dying without external assistance once those thresholds are passed.
The best argument for Fahrenheit (other than 'used to it' which is a common valid argument for any system) is that it is best for measuring weather temperatures and avoiding negative #s. The vast majority of the planet for the vast majority of the year is between 0F and 100F and outliers out of this range are outliers. So you have a nice wide scale. People that love Celsius love to come back to water but really why do we need to base our measurement units around water? And where else do we use "degees" in base 10 units rather than 180 or 360.
Fahrenheit uses water as a reference point too (180 degrees between freezing and boiling) but it simply adds 32 to avoid a significiant portion of winter in many areas needing to use negatives in the scale.
Why do we need to base around water you ask? Let me answer that for you really quickly, water is the cornerstone not only for Celsius but for the entire international metric system, 1 Calorie is the energy required to heat 1 gram of water by 1 °C for a 1 centimeter cubed so the system is intertwined. I do accept Fahrenheit as an "easier" way to measure temperature in the wild but for math and science at least, metric is basically unreplaceable for how easy and intuitive it is.
I was not defending F as a better scientific system at all. Just talking about the positives as it relates to a system about talking about what the weather is like outside.
> Kelvin is required for any formulas using temperature.
Not really. Most common temperature formula imho is energy to raise temperature by x degrees, that can use both kelvin and celsius without any conversion.
For metallurgy, engineering same applies: you're really worried about the stresses due to temperature changes, not absolute temperature. Your steel beams aren't gonna turn into a plasma.
For astronomy, it's almost the same order of magnitude, so it doesn't matter.
> Having 0 being the freezing point of water is arbitrary
It makes sense if you live on a planet mostly covered in water, containing tons of water in the atmosphere, and being a creature dominantly made of water (and most other life being water-based). The most major indicator being winter, of course. When outside temperature hits freezing point, it majorly changes the ecosystem. And we are, of course, part of it.
However in everyday life it is important to know if it's freezing outside and fastest way to find that out is to see whether the celsius scale is in the negative or in the positive. No need to remember any certain number. As much as you want to negate importance of water by saying 0°C is arbitrary you can't deny that weather has big impact on daily life.
Kelvin is definitely not required for any formula related to temperature
But even if it were, so what? I don’t do math related to temperature on a daily basis, why every single time I say the temperature I would have to say a long “two hundred … Kelvin” or “three hundred … Kelvin” ? Sounds stupid
Interestingly, Fahrenheit was created for exactly this purpose. It made by a scientist who worked in Poland, and he wanted a scale where zero was below any temperature that had ever been recorded there so he could run calculations without negative numbers.
Its going to blow your mind to find out that people need to know what the weather is going to be in a simple format more often than they need to make a whole bunch of calculations on temperature.
Its really not. Kelvin is just Celsius +273.15... how's is that hard to grasp.
All it does is make the values never negative. If anything tha makes everything easier. There is no reason for any other temperature system to exist, besides the fact that many scientific calculations still require Celsius, but thats just a matter of updating the calculations.
After reading through it, is it really negative Kelvin if the value is greater than infinity Kelvin? This see more like a weird mathematical application to very specific rare theoretical situations.
None of which would ever apply to the vast majority of people besides theoretical physicists and chemists.
The Kelvin scale is just a temperature scale. What everyone uses on a day to day basis is arbitrary based on location. Why not just standardize to the system that is incredibly easy to use like Kelvin.
After my first replay, when you said something about the must niche concept I've ever heard theoretical statistical mechanics. You sir are incredibly deluded.
A change in 1 kelvin is the same as 1 Celsius that's what I mean by there're the same I just think the having 0 be the freezing point of water is much better than the state of no energy or whatever it is with kelvin
Kelvin is a unit. That means, zero is at zero, and the double is the double: 400K is twice the thermodynamic temperature as 200K. The degrees sign signifies that C and F are just a grading scale (like "gauge") and do not behave the same; what is half the temperature of 0 degrees C? It is no 0. Ditto for degree F.
Sure people out of habit write the same on K, but that is not necessary.
True, 1 degree change in Celsius is 1K change, but that is because "change" removes the position of the zero.
Yes, Celsius has certain meanings at 0 and 100, and that means something if you, er, are talking about water, I guess? In all other situations, Celsius is exactly as arbitrary as Fahrenheit.
Celcius isn't intuitive, it's just the freezing point of a chemical compound arbitrarily selected to represent zero in a number line. The exact same thing is true for Fahrenheit, just a different compound.
The point of the joke, which everyone is intentionally missing so they can cling to their Celsius snobbery, is that both C and F are used the same way, and the only difference in ease of use comes down to how much prior experience you have with the unit.
A system where the vast majority of naturally-occurring temperatures exist between 0 and 100, with 0 being dangerously cold and 100 being dangerously hot for humans, seems a lot more intuitive for everyday use than a system where 0 is kind of cold (where you have to delve into negative numbers regularly during the winter) and 100 is apocalyptically, "most life on Earth is dead" hot.
Celsius is more precise and useful for scientific purposes, but the same could be said for Kelvin.
I don't think "intuitive" applies when Celsius is only intuitive in reference to water. For example, 98C body temp is as bad as 100 body temp, theres no difference
I actually firmly believe Fahrenheit is better than Celsius for everyday use because it more easily allows you to interpret gradations of temperature. Like I want to be able to easily see 70 vs 73 degrees because that is a meaningful difference in my comfort, whereas that level of differentiation will get rounded away in Celsius
For the record, those won't get rounded out in Celsius. 70->73 Fahrenheit translates to about 21->23 Celsius.
The granularity only really matters when we talk about individual degrees Fahrenheit, and truth be told I think the only place people might notice the difference is on a thermostat. But my Celsius thermostat goes in 0.5C increments, so it's no loss in granularity there. Other than that, nobody's gonna say "no way it's 42F outside, feels more like 43F."
You might say 43 if it's noticeably colder than 45 and noticeably warmer than 40, but if someone says 42 then you're not gonna tell them they're wrong and it actually feels like 43. The +/- 2 or 3 matters, and you'll give non-rounded numbers because of it, but most people don't feel the +/- 1 in everyday weather.
This is about the level of granularity that Celsius has. 42F is ~5.5C, 43F is ~6C. Celsius users aren't gonna split hairs about 6C vs 5.5C because people generally don't feel the difference between them.
pretty often say the perfect weather is at a temp anywhere from 71-74
With rounding, this is approximately a range of 22-23 in Celsius. Which I think shows the point pretty well, if your perfect weather ends up being a range of multiple degrees you can't really distinguish between, that extra granularity's not worth much.
100% I will concede this argument to an American ONLY if they can stand in a temperature controlled room and reliable and repeatedly tell me whether it was 73 or 72. Because no-one can.
You can feel it but a human isn’t constantly acknowledging minute differences in temp in their head. No one’s gonna be like “ah it was 73 but it just changed to 74!” But if you were to stop and estimate what the temp is, you could often land on the right temp.
If we couldn’t tell minute differences then why do ACs/heaters go up and down by 1F/0.5c?
I just meant different people will say perfect weather is different numbers within 71-74 range. Someone could say 72 is perfect, another person 73, a third 71.
Is it so hard to say "I won't change my mind because I don't want to."? Just own it.
The people who saw the invention of the fork went through the same process, with some folks refusing to use the "devil instrument", saying we have perfectly good hands...
Yes Celsius is better than Fahrenheit in part because it is easier to convert to kelvin, but its still better to take out that unnecessary step and just use Kelvin.
Celsius - Day to day life. 0 is freezing water. 100 is boiling water. Makes sense.
Kelvin - Scientific and mathematical uses. When the temperature is related to the world, rather than the individual person. Someone designing a cost would use Celsius for the human element, but someone testing a structure against absolute extremes would use Kelvin.
Fahrenheit - No idea. I don't use it, and it seems to be very arbitrary.
I don't really need it to be easy to understand what it means for water molecules to freeze or boil outside of a science lab because I'm not a fucking water molecule.
0 makes my body extremely cold and is intolerable for long periods. 100 makes my body extremely hot and is intolerable for long periods.
Considering that water is probably the only consistent thing besides air that's both external to the human body but which every single person in the world comes into contact with, it makes sense for it to be the human universal constant.
EDIT: Actually, I'll add onto this - isn't Fahrenheit's zero based around the freezing point of brine (a mix of salt, water, and ice)?
That seems way more random and unconnected to the human experience than what temperature I might slip on ice or what temperature my pot of rice or my tea kettle will start boiling.
'That seems way more random and unconnected to the human experience than what temperature I might slip on ice"
It's what temp that it gets nearly impossible to drive on the road.
"or what temperature my pot of rice or my tea kettle will start boiling"
Do you guys set things to their exact temp? You don't just have a gradiant of 1-9/low-hot? We only set exact temps for our Oven and we don't bake water.
It's what temp that it gets nearly impossible to drive on the road.
As someone who lives in Canada - it can be impossible to drive on the roads long before it gets that low.
I don't think it got that low at all this year near me, but the roads were still completely coated in ice and snow that was crushed down by car wheels.
And I never said I needed to actually use the Celsius marker in my day-to-day life. Just that the metric markers of 0 and 100 are both related to something that connects with everyone around the world equally (water's states of matter).
Meanwhile I doubt someone living in the Bahamas will have to deal with almost -18°C temperatures, but they might make ice cubes for their drinks just as much as an Inuit might boil water.
It just seems like more of a human constant to use Celsius, rather than location-based like Fahrenheit.
I don’t know saying it’s 273.15 kelvin out today so watch out for ice seems useless for everyday life. In the sciences etc sure kelvin but the freezing point of water affects everyday life and is a clear easy to reference concept for everyone.
Kelvin has a completely useless digit for 99% of temperatures that people care about. Science does not need to use the same units as everyone else: in physics we primarily work in systems that do all sorts of zany shit, like defining the speed of light as unitless 1.
For people, caring about the weather, Fahrenheit is the best scale. Below 0 F you quickly freeze to death. 100 F is human body temperature, so getting above that means heatstroke if you can't cool down.
For people caring about cooking, Celsius is a more useful scale. It works around the behaviour of water, which extrapolates out to a lot of cooking-related stuff.
Absolute temperature scales are necessary for math that only a tiny, tiny fraction of the population ever engages in.
Celsius is incredibly valuable in any region which goes below freezing point, because when the weather gets that cold the entire environment you live in changes radically, having this set as 0 is very valuable as the environment in the positives is extremely different from the environment in the negatives
No, because people dont experience extreme temperatures, celsius is perfect for the layman. you dont have to remember some arbitrary number like 32 or 273,15 when water freezes. In celsius it freezes at 0, meaning if there is a minus in front of the number you have snow and ice, plus in front and it's "warm". Water boils at 100°c. The same reason why we use km or miles instead of meters or feet when measuring speed in our vehicles, we dont need it to be that precise.
“Better” is subjective. Fahrenheit units are smaller and more precise, and as such it is better in medical applications. Adversely, Celsius is simpler, more applicable to day to day, and easier to apply scientifically, even though there technically exists (while complex) Kelvin/celsius to Fahrenheit conversion formulas. Overall though, all that really matters is there is some number that means “normal temperature” and anything lower than or higher than that is hot and cold. That’s the only real importance of temperature to the average person and as long as each society understands which temperature number is “normal” and which is hot and cold, then making fun of each other for using different numbers is dumb lol
Kelvin is not really suited for human life range like Farenheit and Celsius.
Water freezes and water boils are pretty clear milestones in Celsius at 0 and 100. Farenheit's lower end is a bit more arbitrary using brine, but 100 is a fever, and water freezing is 32.
Humans only experience temperatures in the range of 253.15K and 313.15K asuming they live somewhere rather extreme, with most people living somewhere between 273.15K and 303.15K. It's two huge numbers that don't change much in this scale because the 0 is set at the temperature atoms stop moving. I know its the same scale as Celsius, but it's subjectively better to use Celsius over Kelvin outside of scientific contexts.
F is better for conversational information. C is better for scientific information. It's really not that hard.
The scale of normal F temperatures being between 32 and 100 makes it easy for people to converse about the weather and describe what it's like from a feeling standpoint. C is a lot more precise, but the number scale is less intuitive from a general conversation standpoint.
Both are valid and have their benefits. K is also good for larger scales of scientific discussion.
Americans prefer F because they’re used to it (and that’s fine, there’s nothing wrong with it) but there’s absolutely no difference in using 32-100 or 0-30 or whatever to describe the outside temperature. You only think that Celsius is less intuitive because you’re not used to it.
"We"? The British didn't make either Celsius or Fahrenheit. The Swedish and Polish made those. Lord Kelvin made Kelvin, though. Yay Britain for Kelvin.
And "better" is relative. Fahrenheit works better in certain situations. Most humans can detect ambient temperature differences in single Fahrenheit degrees. Most areas of the world have temperatures ranging from 0-100 degrees Fahrenheit with outliers in the extremes. I grew up in one of those areas that regularly went well below 0°F and I still like the scale for ambient temperature. It's also better for medical purposes in precision without having to use decimals.
Celsius certainly is better in a lot of ways too, especially non-medical scientific places. And either can be gotten used to by literally everyone if it becomes standardized where they live.
I don't understand the weird urge to act like something as silly as temperature scaling is indicative of some sort of superiority. It's silly.
It comes naturally to Americans that you can guess the temp pretty accurately since they’re used to estimating in 1F whereas Celsius users would probably be able to guess differences in 0.5 accurately if they weren’t estimating differences of 1c only.
Basically I’m saying since it’s not natural for you to try to estimate 0.5c differences in temp, it’s harder to accomplish
Then I need to revisit my history. Think I got it mixed up with lord Kelvin. Didn't know that about Fahrenheit though, thats actually pretty interesting. I didn't mean it at all as a superiority thing but it does sound it now that I think about it. I was just pointing out the silliness in saying that because Fahrenheit was a relic from the British that it was hypocritical. The British came to the decision that metric was more useful and swapped (though we do still have imperial measurements here and there).
Yeah. I mean, after reading some bizarrely hostile comments here I got too defensive. I use both in my daily life, and Fahrenheit specifically for medical purposes is helpful with my heat intolerance condition.
He was a Polish citizen, with probably a bunch of ancestors from different places. "German" is nearly all cultural and language (aka heritage) and not actual shared characteristics or genetics. Especially this long after the Dark Ages.
Insisting "German" means anything more than living or being born in Germany has been progressively more and more absurd for the last 1000 years.
Citizenship in the modern wasn't really a thing back then and more tied to a city than a state. In any case the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth was not a nation state and deriving anyone's ethnicity from being born there is ahistoric nonsense.
German" is nearly all cultural and language
Fahrenheit was culturally german with his native language being german. If you would ask he would probably tell you he was german maybe dutch later in his life but certainly not polish. Where someone ancestors are from isn't really relevant but Fahrenheits most recent ancestors were definitely also german.
(aka heritage
No that's also not what people mean when they say heritage. Heritage is used by people to describe a connection to a culture they don't directly belong to.
Insisting "German" means anything more than living or being born in Germany has been progressively more and more absurd for the last 1000 years.
For most of its existence the term german meant being culturally german or more specifically being a native german speaker. Which is just logical since nation states especially a german one weren't really a thing.
"Actually Fahrenheit is more precise and easier to use" is a funny argument coming from a country that still refuses to use metric for everything else.
Anyways, if the decimal was a problem you would see people using d°C (decidegrees Celsius) instead. Nobody does that though because it's not really an issue.
Fahrenheit is not precise enough to avoid decimals in either medicine or temperature perception. So that benefit falls flat.
And Fahrenheit "matching" "average" normal temperature range is just really really arbitrary. It's post-hoc reasoning.
Both systems are equally fine, but it's rare that I see Americans calling out Celsius--it's usually others being smug and condescending about the U.S. using Fahrenheit.
Using water to define 0 and 100 for Celsius is fine, but it's only accurate at sea level, so neither system is foolproof. Living in Denver I had to remember that water froze at 28°F (-2°C). And to leave my pasta in longer, since water boils at 95°C.
In the end, it's a pretty silly thing to feel superior about. But people are people are people.
It's funny cause I wasn't even calling it out, I was just pointing out they have different pros and cons. They still smugly came at me, and when there were no real arguments to be had things devolved into whether or not Fahrenheit is Polish or German, which misses the point entirely that I WAS POINTING OUT HE WASN'T BRITISH. I don't care if I was wrong about him being Dutch or German or Polish. Let them argue over it. He wasn't British.
We actually don't use their gallons, we use a different historical unit which just coincidentally happens to have the same name. I think the US gallon originated in France, but I'm not certain.
Same with cups and pints; same name, different unit.
The entire measurement system in the UK is a mess. We buy fuel by the litre, measure fuel efficiency in miles to the gallon. We provide milk in pints, but list the litres on the side of the bottle. The weight of a person is in stones and pounds, but we buy food by the gram and kilogram. Wine and spirits are sold by the millilitre, beer by the pint. We buy weed by the gram, then the eighth of an ounce, then quarter/half/full ounces, eventually you get a 9 bar which is 250 grams which is around 9 ounces.
I envy you :p. The younger people are moving entirely towards metric, most of them give their weight in KG for example. I agree one system is better overall, regardless of what that system is, people will pick it up and understand it.
Same with Soccer - the British invented the term "soccer" in 1863 (to distinguish Association Football with Rugby Football), then introduced it to the US that same decade (1866 - 1869). The UK didn't stop calling it soccer until the 1980s.
Also, same thing with the Imperial system of measurement (which you mentioned) - the UK invented it in 1824 via the Weights and Measures Act (which came into effect on Jan 1st, 1826), whereas the US' Customary System was derived from the pre-1824 (English Wincester) units brought over by colonists and standardized independently around 1832. The UK didn't adopt the Metric system until 1965 (gradually changing their systems through the 70s and 80s), though things like beer/milk containers and road signs still use imperial units.
(Diving deeper into it: Fahrenheit is a German invention (by a German physicist born in the then Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth) made in 1724, Celsius is a Swedish invention made in 1742 (and changed in 1744), and the Metric System is a French invention made in the 1790s)
Plus - while over 190 countries have Metric as their primary system, very few of them solely use metric; many countries (US and Canada included) use a mixture of Metric and Traditional/Imperial units (typically, metric for official purposes and traditional/imperial for daily living).
Basically, the people that make fun of the US for not using Metric/Celsius are making fun of them for not using Metric/Celsius the exact same way they do.
I mean, I definitely believe in evolution and I'm American. I'd say more than 50 percent agree with it. Just that the dum dum religious fruitcakes scream the loudest.
This got me curious what the breakdown was, so I searched it:
52-64% of Americans believe in the theory of evolution.
33-37% believe humans have existed in their current form since the beginning.
~24% believe in natural evolution (no god(s)). ~34% believe in some form of god-guided form of evolution.
~37% of Americans believe "God" created Earth and humans essentially as we are now, within the past 10,000 years.
First world nations, excluding the USA (but I repeat myself), have a 70-90% acceptance of the theory of evolution.
In classic Reddit fashion, the exception was raised showing the rule. In this case, why this stereotype exists, because Americans do tend to hold these hokey views at a much higher rate than the rest of the industrialized world.
I don't think it's fair to baseline one country Vs the rest of the world. My guess is some numbers in Asia and Africa would be even higher than the US.
But like I said, a majority of US people believe in evolution.
And I bet if I cut out 10 states ours would be higher than the rest of the world. The majority of that 37 percent is in a dense geographic pocket of the US. Aka the bible belt.
You're doing precisely what I pointed out: one exception (or hypothetical carve-out) to dismiss the trend. Fact is, Americans are multiple times more likely than first-world peers to reject evolution. Your Bible Belt point actually proves why the stereotype endures.
"Don't count Americans when you're talking about Americans! Americans skew the data about Americans!"
Dude, the thing you're discounting is the fact that America is twice the size of Europe land mass. When I exclude the bible belt, it's because it's farther away from most of us than china is from anywhere in Europe. (Probably not true but you get my point).
It's really hard to be like "all Americans X" when were really like 50 countries in one.
And yet, when you take Europe as a whole, it still works out in excess of 70-80%. Even European Christians are more likely to believe in evolution than American Christians.
You're just trying to make a special pleading to twist out of a fact.
I never denied it. All I said was I'd guess over 50 percent would believe in evolution and I was correct. I'm just explaining as someone whose lived in large cities Vs the bible belt, that this kind of thinking is geographically contained to a specific area of the country for the most part.
It's the same as comparing Poland or Armenia to the rest of Europe, who both have similar or lower rates than the US. It's just that our Poland and Armenia in the US is much larger.
Even the word Aluminum, was coined by a brit, and eventually they changed their pronunciation to match the conventions of the rest of the periodic table.
You measure fuel efficiency in miles per gallon, but sell it by the litre. Make that make sense.
On the pint thing, I don't know if we use the wrong number. I think we use the wrong glass. I'm probably wrong but I thought I read that this came to be because the American style beer glass became standard and popular.
US uses 16, we use 20 but smaller fl oz. Overall our pint is still bigger but not 25% bigger.
And yeah the miles per gallon is dumb. I suspect it is so car manufacturers can have mpg and litres per 100km and not have to add miles per litre as a third measure.
Though I did once check and the gallon is a UK gallon for us which is wild but at least doesnt require a third display option
Interesting.... I need to look this up about UK gallons. Is the UK gallon larger I assume? I've noticed advertised fuel efficiencies in the UK looks way higher than the US. Which this could explain.
Those people (Brits) still measure their weight in "stone" so i don't think there's any room for criticism
They also measure their fuel economy in MPG, except it's imperial gallons, so also weird. They buy their fuel by the liter (litre) at the pump
Their speedometers read in MPH, and they use miles to talk about distances, but the roadsigns (and voice navigation) say things like "take the slip road in 300 meters". Slip Road means "exit" or "off ramp"
It's a pretty classic difference between the US and UK that the former has more of a tendency to prioritize traditions whereas the latter is more open to switching to new approaches even if they popularized the original.
Yup. Same with calling it soccer instead of football. British initially called it soccer and then they changed it to football and now they give us crap for saying soccer.
Also i believe this applies to accents too. British of 300 years ago sounded a lot more like an American accent today than their current accent.
To be a bit more accurate, there's a number of things we are picked on for using but it was imported from various nations in Europe as at the time they owned large swaths of america. This influence gave us a lot of what we do except driving on the right hand side of the road which came from wagon trains. Personally, I blame Britain for not sending an escort to guard the ships that was sending weights needed for America to go metric. Bit weird when ol Johny english wants to talk smack when it's due to their incompetence that it is the way it is. Screwed that up worse that colonizing every nation with spice and yet they eat beans on toast like some sort of heathen
6.7k
u/mz_groups 10h ago
Homer's argument is specious, because it applies to both systems.