I’m not arguing for K over C. I’m arguing that C and F are both fine. People acting like C is fundamentally better are mistaken. They’re both just setting 0 as some useful value that we can still go below.
0 (least water movement) to 100 (most water movement)
Temperature is a measure of movement. If we can continue to lower or raise the temperature, these are not the lowest or highest values for movement.
And people arguing for C because it’s metric are just wrong, because it isn’t metric. It’s frequently used by the same people who use the metric system, but it isn’t metric. The metric unit for temperature is K.
I agree that K is impractical. C and F have far more utility in everyday life. In my opinion, they’re both fine. For cooking, I tend to think in C. For weather, I tend to think in F. They’re both just arbitrary choosing useful values, and this means they’re both useful for different things.
You know what? This is completely on me. I put words in your mouth by saying that C is just as reasonable as m, l, and g, but at no point did you voice support one way or the other. For all I know, your arguments across the spectrum may be based on absolute values. Perhaps you prefer measurements for time and distance based on the hyperfine transition of hydrogen, and weight based on atomic mass.
I was pushing the rationale that arguing for metric units, which are based on freshwater at sea level, but against C, which is also based on (the perceived states of) freshwater at sea level, is an inconsistent argument. But, once again, you didn’t push that narrative; I made assumptions and attributed that narrative to you.
I’m not arguing for K over C. I’m arguing that C and F are both fine. People acting like C is fundamentally better are mistaken. They’re both just setting 0 as some useful value that we can still go below.
Temperature is a measure of movement. If we can continue to lower or raise the temperature, these are not the lowest or highest values for movement.
And people arguing for C because it’s metric are just wrong, because it isn’t metric. It’s frequently used by the same people who use the metric system, but it isn’t metric. The metric unit for temperature is K.
I agree that K is impractical. C and F have far more utility in everyday life. In my opinion, they’re both fine. For cooking, I tend to think in C. For weather, I tend to think in F. They’re both just arbitrary choosing useful values, and this means they’re both useful for different things.
You know what? This is completely on me. I put words in your mouth by saying that C is just as reasonable as m, l, and g, but at no point did you voice support one way or the other. For all I know, your arguments across the spectrum may be based on absolute values. Perhaps you prefer measurements for time and distance based on the hyperfine transition of hydrogen, and weight based on atomic mass.
I was pushing the rationale that arguing for metric units, which are based on freshwater at sea level, but against C, which is also based on (the perceived states of) freshwater at sea level, is an inconsistent argument. But, once again, you didn’t push that narrative; I made assumptions and attributed that narrative to you.