What’s the justification for degrees Celsius? It fails both at being a scientific and an everyday standard. Sure, the freezing and boiling points of water are important, but are they important enough to base a temperature scale on? It’s so arbitrary, especially since it’s the same as kelvin, but kelvin has the more sensible 0 degrees = absolute zero. As for Celsius being used in an everyday context… perhaps I’m just biased, but it’s so much more right to have 0-100 encapsulate the majority of human experience. Round numbers like 100 are so pretty and comfortable, and it’s so easy to remember that over 100 degrees = way too hot and below 0 degrees = you might as well die. Is there some benefit to degrees Celsius that I’m missing, or am I more right than I ever imagined?
Well, I do prefer Fahrenheit since I agree that its 0-100 scale, purely by chance, covers the general extremes of weather, the most common reason for needing to know temperature.
But those running the metric system are a pretty anal bunch, and prefer to have all units based on actual measurements so they can be duplicated anywhere. (The problem of units of time makes their little anal heads explode and they throw up their hands and give up, undoubtedly cursing the real world for not being so nicely divided.) (Even the use of “Celsius” is a sign of anal retentiveness: “centigrade,” which was fine – and which better described the scale, since the scale used isn’t Celsius’s – had to be changed so they could capitalize the C.)
Well, maybe I am biased, but I find the Celsius scale superior precisely because round numbers like 100 are pretty and comfortable. On the Celsius scale, 0 and 100 mean something meaningful. On the Fahrenheit scale, those have no meaning, and nor do any other easily remembered points. 212 is boiling and 36 is freezing and 96 is body heat and I have no idea where room temperature is.
Having lived with Celsius my whole life, I’ve never had problems with negative numbers.
Correction, thirty two degrees is freezing.
I think your impression is based on your personal levels of experience with both systems. If you live in a country where daily temperatures are given in Celsius, they make sense pretty quickly.
I can see why 100 Fahrenheit may make sense to you, since it is close to body temperature (37 in Celsius) but 0 Fahrenheit is pretty much just a random spot in the middle of pretty d*mn cold as far as I can tell. 0 Celsius, (32 Fahrenheit) is where we notice the fairly obvious phenomenon of precipitation changing from rain to snow. So it seems pretty well grounded in human experience.
I sense a forum move. GD? IMHO? The mind boggles.
Psst! Priceguy! Thirty-two is freezing, not thirty-six on the F scale. 
I think you’re underestimating its role as a scientific scale. Celsius has more real-world uses than Kelvin; it is easier to say “ice melts at 100 C” than it is to say “ice melts at 273.15 K.” Since water is the basis for life, it makes sense to have a temperature scale tailored to it.
I agree that Fahrenheit is better for everyday, real-world use, though, which makes sense considering the way it was developed (zero was set at the lowest outdoor temperature that winter, 100 was the inventor’s body temperature–I guess he had the flu). F is a temperature system that’s tailored to real life, just like C is tailored to water. It’s definitely one case where the metric system isn’t all it’s cracked up to be. I know I have an American bias, but really, it’s far better at describing outdoor temperature than C, and since that’s what most non-scientists use temperature for, I think it makes a lot more sense.
See?
I think you’ve pretty much hit the nail on the head. I remember temperatures being quoted in Farenheit when I was a child. We’d all consider summer days to be “very hot” when the temperature made it into the 90s. For the past thirty years we’ve used Celsius. Everyone has acclimatised. The heat yardstick is now when the temerpature reaches the mid 30s.
And body temp is 98.6, not 96.
Ice melts at 0C, water boils at 100C.
maybe I am biased, but I think that the Celcius scale is much better than Fahrenheit because:
It presents temperatures significant to humans in nice, small, round numbers
-40 = Not going outside today
-25 = Brrrrr… where are the cursed car keys
<0 = Hmmm, it might snow today
>0 = Hmmm, it might rain today
15 = Better wear a jacket today
20-30 = Ahhh, perfect
35-40 = Whew, hot
>40 = Not going outside today
PS: Ice melts only at 100C? 100C=273K? What??
It is, of course, very easy to say that ice melts at 100C. It’s also incorrect. Water boils at 100C.
I grew up in Australia, where the metric system is used. I have now lived in the United States for over five years. I am completely comfortable with the fahrenheit system, and am equally comfortable talking in celcius or fahrenheit when it comes to temperature. I can also translate between the two virtually instantly in my head.
I think that both systems are equally useful for everyday needs. As others have said, once you’re used to either system, it seems perfectly natural and reasonable as a day-to-day measure of temperature. People staunchly defending the fahrenheit system as somehow more logical for everyday use are, in my opinion, simply reflecting their own experience.
In my opinion both systems are fine for everyday use, and the celcius system has the advantage of actually having some scientific rationale and utility.
Next we’ll have someone claiming that measuring in feet is more logical because we all have feet, but no-one has a “meter.” Perhaps you’d like to go back to cubits?
Hah, yeah, didn’t realize I’d posted that until after I pressed the button. See, Celsius doesn’t work!
Well, technically ice does melt at 100 degrees on M. Celsius’s scale. And boils at zero. Because he originally devised it so that ascending numbers meant colder.
On the centigrade scale, which we’ve now been taught to refer to as “Celsius,” you’re of course right in questioning that. Ice melts damawful fast at 100 C – it probably sublimes, for the most part!
Heck, same justification as there is for degrees Fahrenheit, Kelvin, Reaumur, etc. and considering that F as the everyday-use scale is pretty much limited to the USA, I don’t think C needs that much justification.
Speak for yourself, toots. 
What others have said about familiarity being the key.
Someone mentioned Farenheit as being better suited to weather forecasts…I argue the oppostie. Modern 24-hour forecasts can often predict the temperature to an accuracy of one degree celsius - but not to within one degree farenheit.
Ouch! - but spot on
Of course, some folks would probably argue that this is precisely why F is better. After all, if America uses it, it must be good, right?