In defence of Fahrenheit against the Celsius

Besides my affinity for iMessage and disdain for WhatsApp, one of the most American things about me is probably my strong feelings for the Fahrenheit temperature scale.

I can see eyes rolling and hear audible sighs as I type this, but trust me when I say that this isn’t just a matter of me stubbornly sticking with something I grew up with.

Despite learning about much of the world's disdain for Fahrenheit as I got older, I’ve done my level best to make an informed decision on the matter.

I’ll make one concession. Celsius is great for science. But, broadly speaking, Fahrenheit is better for what most of us look for in measuring temperatures, and that’s answering the question “What does it feel like outside?” The plentiful increments provided by Fahrenheit compared to Celsius make it more descriptive.

For several years, I lived in the UAE, and as the temperatures in the Emirates are relatively consistent, I can understand why Fahrenheit’s advantages might seem minimal. But for much of the rest of the world, where temperatures are far more volatile (and increasingly so, thanks to climate change), Fahrenheit gives you a better way to gauge what it actually feels like outside. When you're deciding whether or not you need to bundle up and to what extent you need to bundle up, the wider range in temperatures helps you make an informed decision that can make a world of difference between comfort and absolute, frostbitten misery.

When the seasons change in many parts of the US, I should also point out that the variance provided by Fahrenheit comes in handy when both snow flurries and oppressive heat can sometimes be experienced in the same day. Unlike Celsius, Fahrenheit provides precision that can really help you prepare for the day in terms of clothing and comfort.

The keyword here is precision.