Ironic since I don't live in the midwest. I've visited there during summer once. :)
> The difference between -1C and 1C is something you can literally see around you. The difference between -1F and 1F is not. Anything “below zero” is literally frozen and completely inhospitable to normal human life!
I dunno, down to 20°F/-7°C, it's pretty easy to have liquid water still when hit by direct sunlight. It's also not really that extremely cold (I'm still fine with short sleeve shirts in the 20s F). 0°F/-17°C is where I'd say things get extremely cold and even direct sunlight ceases to melt water.
I believe you when you say you feel that way at those temperatures, but I personally wouldn’t wear just a t-shirt when at any temperature under 10C/50F.
So Fahrenheit matches the subjective temperature range where you might feel comfortable, but not me. And so you can’t make a general statement that it matches “human living conditions” when others think that Celsius better matches their comfortable range.
The idea that 0-100F is somehow the range of “human living conditions” is completely bizarre to me, but I can see why someone from a place like the American Midwest might think this is true.
To me 0C is so much more meaningful than 0F, especially when talking about weather. The difference between -1C and 1C is something you can literally see around you. The difference between -1F and 1F is not.
Anything “below zero” is literally frozen and completely inhospitable to normal human life!