I’m in favor of it for everything but temperature.
I rarely care about the boiling point of water. I do care about whether I need to wear shorts or a heavy coat and Fahrenheit is a much better scale for the temperatures we are most concerned with.
I’ll concede that the centigrade temp range is not as finely divided as the Fahrenheit is but the difference is so small that as far as feeling goes you would not notice. Does Canada or the rest of the world have a problem with the centigrade thermometer?
Some of us haven’t. I ignore the filthy metric system as much as possible. Its units of measurement are hopelessly impracticable. I made a point of buying my lathe graduated in inches, and my scales measure in grains and my verniers in thousandths.
So you apparently don’t do commercial work or work from drawings made by others.
Well, that’s a kind of conversion. Don’t worry about what it was when you paid per pound, just look at the price per kilo now. Granted, I’m being idealistic that merchants won’t take advantage of the sudden switch to change the prices from $1/lb to $800/kilo ! Given the way they increase the prices across the board and then claim that club card holders get a discount, I’m pretty sure some of them will do this.
Yes, you just repeated what I said.
It’s not about how finely graded it is, it’s about the nature of the completely arbitrary zero point and 100deg. point. So it’s the freezing point and boiling point of water, they’re still arbitrary points. At best, it makes manually calibrating a thermometer marginally easier.
The other metric units, length, volume, etc. have the benefit of easily scaling from small measures to large measures. There is no scaling needed in temperature, it’s always in degrees, we don’t deal with milli-degrees or kilo-degrees.
It’s simply a temperature scale with 0-100 in different places.
We actually had something like that happen when we adopted the euro. Lots of people complained about price hikes, but research later showed this wasn’t as prevalent as people thought.
Of course here super markets price produce at €/500g or €/kg completely randomly so as to make sure you have no idea how expensive everything really is. (But they do list prices per kilo or liter for everything that’s prepackaged in small type on the shelf, including stuff like printer ink.)
Not completely we didn’t. Road distances are still in miles, speeds in mph, human heights and weights are usually in Imperial (we still use stones!) and beer comes in pints.
You’re correct of course, but for the sake of conformity why not if starting with water start at zero? Makes sense to me. Lets keep in mind that the Romans had no reasonable way of using the zero in there numbering system. But they seemed to have gotten along just fine. But that’s not my argument. If the English system were the only system then so be it. But its not and the medic system has proven itself as superior.
F did pick 0. *On Fahrenheit’s original scale the lower defining point was the lowest temperature to which he could reproducibly cool brine *. This had the big advantage as IRL temps in populated places rarely go below 0 F, thus rarely te need fot a - to be used.
100 was the temp of a human body. (it’s been jiggered a bit, but so has Celsius, since in his scale 0 was the boiling point, and 100 was freezing!)
Two scale points, usable in normal everyday uses, and both could be replicated outside a lab.
You would have loved pre-1970s English money. 
There was also a “guinea” (worth 21 shillings) at one point … because the system would otherwise be too straightforward.
The reason why the US does not convert all boils down to money and the immediate bottom line at the current moment. The days of putting money back into a business to make it better has long since been ignored. Management and stock holders want immediate return on their dollar. To hell with the future. And as far as the politicians go, well they will do what theire industrial masters tell them to do.
To me, it makes sense to use a " - " when it is freezing out. After all, we make that distinction all the time, in colloquial language (as seen in the expression “it is freezing out”).
Freezing and boiling points of water are the significant temperatures in everyday life and activities, so it makes a lot of sense to use them as endpoints (well, average endpoints - of course they vary with altitude etc.).
Can I assume that you all mean United States customary units, as opposed to the Imperial system actually used in England (and the rest of the UK)? They aren’t quite the same thing, despite the units having the same names.
It might seem like a petty quibble, but I, for one, would raise hell if I was served a US sized pint in my local pub.
I don’t think that’s the reason: it is more that people in general are inherently conservative and unwilling to change; the same was true in Canada, but the government of the day forced the change through.
So, for this one case, you’re ok with picking one arbitrary system over another for no especially logical reason than it’s already there?
Saying water provides good end points goes down the slippery slope of allowing arbitrary contrived values when convenient. If that’s the case, Fahrenheit is the same, it’s convenience is simply different (0F is not a bad measure for “as good as it’ll ever get most places”).
Just go whole hog and set 0 at absolute zero and use Kelvin. The only arbitrary thing there is the gradation, and there’s not going to be any non-arbitrary standard there.
Bullshit.
The reason the US has not converted to the metric system is as simple as “We don’t want to.” If large groups of people all over the country were clamoring for the metric system, government and private businesses alike would comply with their wishes, but the fact is most people don’t care, and your arguments for conversion, whether they are sensible or not, are unconvincing because we have a system that works for us and we have no compelling reason to change, no matter what you think.
The boiling point maybe you have a point about, but the freezing point of water is a very important practical point in day-to-day life. If it’s below freezing out, any precipitation is likely to be snow, rather than rain, and roads can be icy. If it’s above freezing, precipitation is rain, and roads can be wet, but not icy. If it’s hovering around freezing you get a slushy mess.
Zero degrees Celsius is a critical point for human activities. Hardly arbitrary. Being above or below zero Fahrenheit is just the difference between “way the fuck cold” and “way-er the fuck cold-er”.
No, your the one willing to use two systems. I’m just agreeing that when temp is concerned both system are workable. I say lets be consistent. And yes why not use Kelvin? Other than it being a bit awkward to read or say 273.15.