Celcius or Fahrenheit

[Antonio the Sixth]

I'm a proud French and therefore Celsius !

[Hans-im-Glück]

I live in Europe. That's no question for me. Celsius is better and more logical

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

I live in Europe. That's no question for me. Celsius is better and more logical

Yes!

[Hash]

Celsius. I get pissed when people in Canada use fahrenheit instead.

[Sbane]

I prefer using Fahrenheit when dealing with the weather. Otherwise it's celsius, or more likely, kelvin.

[k-onmmunist]

CelSius (normal)

[RIP Robert H Bork]

Fahrenheit obviously.

[War on Want]

Fahrenheit because it's easier for personal use.

[muon2]

I live in Europe. That's no question for me. Celsius is better and more logical

As a scientist fluent in both unit systems, I can say with certainty that there is nothing particularly logical about Celsius.  The kelvin is the official metric unit of temperature and Celcius is considered a derived unit. The official definition of Celsius temperature is the temperature in kelvin - 273.15. There nothing particularly elegant about 273.15.

Other metric units at least have the benefit of a decimal system of names for alternate scales, such as kilometers or nanoamperes. Celsius has no such usage, since those names are reserved for use with kelvin. So on that count Celsius also lacks the inherent logic of the rest of the metric system (SI).

I'm saying there's anything wrong about the Celsius system. I'm just saying that it really isn't more logical than Fahrenheit.

[Ban my account ffs!]

For the weather and cooking, Fahrenheit.

For scientific stuff, celsius.

Celsius and Fahrenheit are pretty easily inter-converted.  For every 10˚C there are 18˚F.

If you can memorize the 10s in celsius... 0C is 32F, 10C is 50F, 20C is 68F, 30C is 86F and so on, it becomes really easy to calculate the temperature in either scale.

So if a Canadian says "yeah, it was about minus 2 this morning", you know it's about 29˚F or so.

[Alexander Hamilton]

Farenheit, mostly because Europe uses Celsius

Also the fact that Farenhiet temperatures are more accurate without getting into decimals.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Fahrenheit (normal)

[ChrisJG777]

Fahrenheit (abnormal)

Fixed. 

[dead0man]

I'll go with the side with fewer jerks.  Fahrenheit by a long shot.

[Psychic Octopus]

Celsius, though I better understand Fahrenheit.

[Vepres]

I'll go with the side with fewer jerks.  Fahrenheit by a long shot.

[Holmes]

When I'm talking about weather, I use Celsius, but when I'm doing calculations in class or for labs, it (has to be) Kelvin, or just a number if it's a change in temperature. Same scale and all.

[ChrisJG777]

I'll go with the side with fewer jerks.  Fahrenheit by a long shot.

Why are you both going for Fahrenheit again? 

[dead0man]

I'll go with the side with fewer jerks.  Fahrenheit by a long shot.

Why are you both going for Fahrenheit again? 

Again?

[minionofmidas]

I'm a proud French and therefore Celsius !

No Réaumur?

[minionofmidas]

It was mentioned before but 0 F is the freezing point of salt water.

But 100 F has nothing to do with human beings; no, 100 F is actually the rectal temperature of a cow...

Who came up with those particular cutoffs?

Mr Fahrenheit, I presume? But why?

[Јas]

It was mentioned before but 0 F is the freezing point of salt water.

But 100 F has nothing to do with human beings; no, 100 F is actually the rectal temperature of a cow...

Who came up with those particular cutoffs?

Mr Fahrenheit, I presume? But why?

Think about it. Freezing salt water...cow rectums...It's obvious really.

[minionofmidas]

It was mentioned before but 0 F is the freezing point of salt water.

But 100 F has nothing to do with human beings; no, 100 F is actually the rectal temperature of a cow...

Who came up with those particular cutoffs?

Mr Fahrenheit, I presume? But why?

Think about it. Freezing salt water...cow rectums...It's obvious really.

Okay, after googling it, 100°F may well be the rectal temperature of cows, but if so it's coincidental. Fahrenheit's randomly defined points from which the scale derives were 0°F which  was the coldest he could get water to be without freezing (by mixing it with salt. The result was obsolete just a few years later, but nvm) which happened to be equal to the coldest temperature measured in his hometown in his lifetime; and 32°F for the normal freezing point of water - which made the normal temperature of humans 96° (four times the difference). Though the modern Fahrenheit is not actually the original Fahrenheit, since his 0 was not a measure sufficiently reproducable for scientific purposes. So now Fahrenheit is officially defined by that 32 and by, er, whatever 100°C comes to in Fahrenheit today (German language wiki article left that detail out). Which makes the scale not identical - the normal temperature of humans on this "new" Fahrenheit is of course 98.odd.

Oh, and the point of picking that 0 was so subzero figures weren't supposed to happen in everyday usage. There was an earlier attempt at a scale, now long out of use, and that had a 0 warmer than Réaumur's and Celsius'.

[muon2]

It was mentioned before but 0 F is the freezing point of salt water.

But 100 F has nothing to do with human beings; no, 100 F is actually the rectal temperature of a cow...

Who came up with those particular cutoffs?

Mr Fahrenheit, I presume? But why?

Think about it. Freezing salt water...cow rectums...It's obvious really.

Okay, after googling it, 100°F may well be the rectal temperature of cows, but if so it's coincidental. Fahrenheit's randomly defined points from which the scale derives were 0°F which  was the coldest he could get water to be without freezing (by mixing it with salt. The result was obsolete just a few years later, but nvm) which happened to be equal to the coldest temperature measured in his hometown in his lifetime; and 32°F for the normal freezing point of water - which made the normal temperature of humans 96° (four times the difference). Though the modern Fahrenheit is not actually the original Fahrenheit, since his 0 was not a measure sufficiently reproducable for scientific purposes. So now Fahrenheit is officially defined by that 32 and by, er, whatever 100°C comes to in Fahrenheit today (German language wiki article left that detail out). Which makes the scale not identical - the normal temperature of humans on this "new" Fahrenheit is of course 98.odd.

Oh, and the point of picking that 0 was so subzero figures weren't supposed to happen in everyday usage. There was an earlier attempt at a scale, now long out of use, and that had a 0 warmer than Réaumur's and Celsius'.

The part about 0 and 100 being roughly set by lab measurement is correct, but when I learned the history of Fahrenheit I learned that like Celsius it was based on freezing and boiling water. Because 32 and 212 are separated by 180 and 180 is divisible by so many integer factors, those points were set to exactly those values.