The author lists the importance of a global temperature scale, then shows a map of North America overlaid with some dots.
> For many people that's Celsius, but for many others it's Fahrenheit.
That second 'many' is disingenuous. For about 90% of the planet's population it's Celsius, and for about 10% it's Fahrenheit.
Author also has some pretty arbitrary and bewildering requirements, including wanting a scale of 0 to 100, yet also avoiding any 3-digit numbers.
Any claims about 'intuition' are misguided -- Celsius makes more sense because a) most people use it, and b) it maps onto the rest of the SI units.
That I happen to feel comfortable at a somewhat arbitrary 21 (c) is not a sufficient or satisfactory reason for other people to let go of deprecated temperature scales.
The requirements list reads as a description of farenheit, which the author then uses in a roundabout way to conclude his presupposition that farenheit is the better unit.
A quick glance at the numbers on Wikipedia puts it a bit under 5%, the bulk of which is inhabitants of the US, but I did leave out the Bahamas for convenience.
> For many people that's Celsius, but for many others it's Fahrenheit.
That second 'many' is disingenuous. For about 90% of the planet's population it's Celsius, and for about 10% it's Fahrenheit.
Author also has some pretty arbitrary and bewildering requirements, including wanting a scale of 0 to 100, yet also avoiding any 3-digit numbers.
Any claims about 'intuition' are misguided -- Celsius makes more sense because a) most people use it, and b) it maps onto the rest of the SI units.
That I happen to feel comfortable at a somewhat arbitrary 21 (c) is not a sufficient or satisfactory reason for other people to let go of deprecated temperature scales.