Then you look at the temperature and think eh…45 isn’t that bad. We’ll survive. That will be the moment the wind whips up and sleet starts hitting you in the face.
Then you look at the temperature and think eh…45 isn’t that bad. We’ll survive. That will be the moment the wind whips up and sleet starts hitting you in the face.
Using -10 - 40 as a range of temperatures experienced by humans makes way less sense than 0 - 100. We’re a base 10 species so it’s much better for regular use.
Metric aficionados rightly point out that the other measures are all nicely base 10, so why doesn’t that argument hold for temperature too? Celsius is inferior.
“The ranges experienced by humans” is extremely variable. My friends from hotter countries can barely handle 10°C, but are fine at 40°C, and it’s entirely the opposite for me.
I assure you that for regular use, Celsius works great. I don’t really think either is better than the other in practice (outside of chemistry), but “it’s the range people experience” is kinda bull. A 10 degree F difference from 0 to 10 is very different from 60 to 70.
Also, water freezing at 0°C (and boiling at 100°C, to a lesser degree) is quite convenient in everyday life. Just check for a minus sign and you know if it can freeze.
Yes, and it’s not like you can’t experience temperatures that are not 0-100°F. Here in Sweden (and Finland) we have saunas, and I can assure you that there is a difference between 100 and say 110 Fahrenheit.
btw, is there any word for “being in a sauna” in English? In Swedish we would say “basta” , which is mentioned in our dictionary (in SAOL and SO but not in the SAOB article from 1901) but Google translate fails to translate it. We also have the longer form “bada bastu” that translates to “take a sauna” but I really prefer the shorter form.
I’m not aware of any word like that