True, but radians or degrees are general more abstract.

"0.24 degrees per hour" (assuming 12 work hours per day) just doesn't really ring to me... and I have a mechanical engineering degree.

It gets worse when you call it 14.4 (arc) minutes per hour.

Ignoring the ‘arc’, that’s dimensionless. You could just call it “0.24” ;-)

I guess it depends on how you do the ignoring. "minutes" by itself usually means "minutes of hour", but I would argue that if you take "minutes of arc" and ignore the "arc" the better answer is "minutes of ____"

Picture an analog clock and it can be 0.008 hours/hour... about one percent of an hourhand's movement.

measuring degrees doesn't seem useful anyways, because it is not the rotating speed that is impressive but the speed against the ground at the outer edge.

I would guess it's the length of the outermost arc, sort of makes sense with the relation to employees inside not noticing it.

It was not only rotated, but also shifted: „was shifted 52 feet south“

Let's find the 2D (3x3) translation matrix for this.

For angle representation, better use gradians because radians and degrees are too easy.