There are good arguments to be made for everyday use of Fahrenheit over Celsius. The 0-100 range in F cover pretty much all of the temperatures one is likely to experience in the USA. It also has a finer resolution than degrees Celsius in everyday weather temperature ranges.
The SI units are designed for scientific and engineering use and they excel for the purpose they are designed.
You're mostly right, but there are plenty of places in the US where the daily low temperature drops well below zero for significant parts of the year.
I guess the inconvenience with Celsius is that you're more likely to go to negative numbers? Is there a problem other than the having to say "minus ten degrees" vs "fourteen degrees"?
> It also has a finer resolution than degrees Celsius in everyday weather temperature ranges.
I'd make the opposite argument about everyday use. Most people I know would barely differentiate 25C from 26C, so there's not really a need for finer gradations. And the 10 degree increments are surprisingly convenient:
-20 (or less) dangerously cold
-10 -- -20 damn cold
-10 -- 0 winter
0 -- 10 chilly
10 -- 20 brisk
20 -- 30 hot
30 -- 40 sweltering
40 -- 50 damn hot
50 (or more) dangerously hotFrom experience I'd say a sauna with 45°C and 80% humidity is about comparable with one at 80°C and 10% humidity.
The U.S. is a signatory of the Metre Convention (1875). All of our customary units are defined as linear conversions of corresponding SI units. The Watt and Joule (also Ohm) were not standardized until 1893. Funnily enough, the international conference where these were officially decided happened in Chicago.