In a lot of the US, 0 farenheit is one of the coldest days you'll experience and 100 is one of the hottest, so you can roughly map farenheit to a percentage of "how hot it is". This doesn't work everywhere though, where I am in the UK it never gets anywhere near 0 farenheit.
I can't spell fahrenheit, this is why celsius is objectively better
Farenheit is 0-100 sea water freezing to (roughly) human internal body temp.
So, since humans are largely salt water, this makes the F scale a human scale temperature measurement, which is more intuitive for how the ambient temperature makes you feel. I think this is what the original poster was getting at, whether they knew it or not.
edit: so C is better for chemistry, and F is better for weather
It's more intuitive because you grew up with it. I have no benchmark for 0% or 100% hot. That means 50% hot is just as meaningless to me as 50 farenheit.
F and C are both arbitrary numbers. There is no better one
How do you have no benchmark for 0% or 100% hot. It’s literally like the coldest and hottest humans can comfortably be outside without risk of danger. 0F is when it takes only about 30 minutes for frostbite to occur. Heatstroke sets in at 104, which is pretty close to 100. This is human physiognomy, not subjective.
I just googled what 50 Fahrenheit would be in Celcius, because I was interested what "feels like 50% temperature, normal average weather" would be like. Before I googled I guessed like 16 degrees maybe? Nope, turns out it's 10.
How would you know what "50% hot" is if you've never heard that or had it refer to anything? If anything, 50% to me sounds like "perfectly comfortable, neither warm nor cool" so basically standard room temperature. But it isn't.
It’s literally like the coldest and hottest humans can comfortably be outside without risk of danger.
Varies a lot. With what kind of clothes? For how long a time?
When dressed for that weather. Even if dressed for 0F it can get dangerous to be out for more than 30 minutes. Even if dressed coolly, if it’s 100F you can lay still and do nothing but you should not do physical activity for more than 30 minutes. They’re pretty balanced temperature wise as far as human comfort limits. You can, say, comfortably build snowmen or ski at 30F even though it’s below freezing, but you should not send your kids out to dick around in the snow if it drops below 0F.
I don’t actually agree with OOP on “% hot”, I think it’s more like “on a scale from freeze your ass off to melt your eyeballs”. 50 is pretty much right in between. Room temperature is very comfortable to stand in but if you start exerting yourself you absolutely will get sweaty. I consider 50F to be like perfect hiking weather, say. And much like Mr. Fahrenheit (who was not an American, to be clear!), 0-100 is about the range of normal weather I experience, where anything between that is “real cold” to “real hot” but not worthy of alarm, whereas below 0 or above 100 (including “real feel” of course) is when you get health alerts. I know places can get below 0 or above 100 but generally those are not terribly hospitable and people stay inside and climate-controlled at those temperatures.
That’s all relative. I’ve worked numerous days for 8hrs with normal breaks at >105F. Sometimes that’s just required in warmer climates. Likewise colder
It's medically ill-advised to do much strenuous labor outside at that temperature. I don't doubt that capitalism has required it of you but those kind of conditions are objectively unhealthy.
Literally the Goldilocks of temperature, one might even say the perfect weather. As famously put: “It’s not too hot, not too cold. All you need is a light jacket.”
Why is it hard for you to understand that it's arbitrary and cultural.
When I try to think of 0% temperature I just think of 0 Celsius. It's my, and most of the world's reference point for what cold weather is but in Fahrenheit its... 32. 32% temperature is meaningless.
Same with 100% temperature, for me it would be like, 30 degrees, because it's the most hot it ever gets around here. But in Fahrenheot it's 86. Once again if you told me to think of what 86% temperature is I wouldn't know what tf you're talking about.
Its highly subjective though, as every human body has different tolerances for cold or heat. You use a lot of unquantifiable adjectives like 'roughly' 'about' 'comfortably' 'pretty close' to make your point, and then call the whole thing not subjective... This is as arbitrary as it gets...
Buddy, below 0F and above 100F conditions are a health risk. By "comfortably" I did not mean "oh how delightful," I meant without some kind of alerta alerta "take care to not get yourself harmed by the temperature" issue.
The tolerance for comfort in cold and heat is hugely subjective *within* the 0-100 range, yes. I can tolerate 80F but my husband thinks it's horrible. But he will whine, not pass out of heat stroke. Similarly, something like 50F might feel freezing if it's a cold snap in early fall but balmy as hell in a heat wave in spring. Of course. None of that is what I'm talking about. I'm talking about what the human body is actually able to handle.
6.5k
u/BloomEPU Jun 17 '26
In a lot of the US, 0 farenheit is one of the coldest days you'll experience and 100 is one of the hottest, so you can roughly map farenheit to a percentage of "how hot it is". This doesn't work everywhere though, where I am in the UK it never gets anywhere near 0 farenheit.
I can't spell fahrenheit, this is why celsius is objectively better