As I said, I grew up with and actively use Celsius, so I’m unsure why you’re explaining it in a reply to me. I’m also Australian, so your ranges are wildly off for my climate. Summers don’t get started until the 30 C days, and less than 20 C is the heart of winter.
Celsius has many strengths, and is obviously better suited for scientific purposes. Fahrenheit is handy for outdoor temperatures. That doesn’t mean Celsius is useless for those.
These turf wars are weird. A good engineer doesn’t spur different tools, for different tools have different strengths. I can immediately make sense of both systems, and I consider that to my advantage.
It's literally no better for 'outdoor temperatures' in any way. Both F and C systems are effectively arbitrary. It's just about personal preference/what you grew up with.
The range each degree represents in F is smaller, so it allows for more precision while restricting oneself to whole numbers. The may be considered advantageous by some.
1. Casual conversation and weather reports. It's quicker and easier to discuss whole numbers. Also the decade ranges offer more precision, so the 10s, 20s and 30s C cover roughly the same range as the 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s and 90s F, which can be useful. It's not uncommon to discuss the weather in those terms.
2. Adjusting the temperature on a digital climate control interface. You generally just have up and down arrows so you're going to be dealing with fixed increments, and it's convenient for those to be whole numbers.
A minor advantage to be sure, but I think this is what people mean when they say it's better for atmospheric temperatures.
> and is obviously better suited for scientific purposes
Celsius and Fahrenheit are equally arbitrary / bad for scientific purposes, Kelvin is the only scale that makes sense since it's zeroed at absolute zero. Celsius is only marginally better than Fahrenheit in that you mostly deal with temperature increments rather than absolute values and celsius increments are the same as kelvin increments
Celsius and Kelvin are the same scale with just different starting points for 0. So I wouldn't say it's on the same league as Fahrenheit for scientific purposes, you just need to sum/subtract -273.15 to convert. F to C or K is a much more cumbersome conversion comparatively.
Celsius has many strengths, and is obviously better suited for scientific purposes. Fahrenheit is handy for outdoor temperatures. That doesn’t mean Celsius is useless for those.
These turf wars are weird. A good engineer doesn’t spur different tools, for different tools have different strengths. I can immediately make sense of both systems, and I consider that to my advantage.