Of all the parts of the imperial measurements, temperature is the one I'd keep, at least for weather measures. It's a human centric scale rather than scientific, so 0 is cold, 100 is hot, but both are survivable with the right cloths and an accommodating environment. If you get outside of those it starts to get particularly hazardous in either direction though and even near the ends it's 'take some heavy precautions' territory.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's also useful that a moderate climate on average won't go much higher than 100 in the summer, or lower than 0 in the winter. So you know if it does then either that day is an outlier, or you don't live in a moderate climate. So it makes that information just a bit more intuitive. Speaking as a Michigander at least, that's what those numbers mean to me.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I hope that holds true, given we just had the twin cities marathon canceled for excessive heat in October, in MN where we still mention the Halloween blizzard of 94 in hushed tones, that scale might need recalibration.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yeah it's definitely drifted a bit since Fahrenheit was first conceived what with climate change and all. That doesn't mean the scale is wrong, it means the moderate climates are slowly moving elsewhere.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Maybe we just discovered an instant solution to global warming, just readjust the temp scale. Move everything up by a couple dozen degrees and suddenly we're in a new ice age. 🤔

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

I see what you mean, but the freezing point of water is arguably the most critical temperature when it comes to weather. Celsius is easy in this regard.

+3°C? => Precipitation will almost certainly be liquid.

-3°C? => Precipitation will be mostly solid and any possible rain or drizzle will be supercooled, forming a sheet of ice on whatever it lands on. Look out for slippery roads!