You can think of F as a “% hot” measurement for weather.
0 = no heat: getting dangerously cold for humans.
50 = half hot, half cold: wear long pants and a jacket.
75 = three quarters hot, getting close to t shirt weather.
100= fully hot: getting dangerous for humans.
Yes you can go over or under, but you can consider those to be extreme weather (120% hot!)
Fahrenheit is designed for humans. Celsius is in love with distilled water at sea level. Kelvin and Rankine are actually useful in math, science, and engineering.
Is 0% hot no extra heat, like perfect room temp or is it zero heat, the death of all life?
What does 100% hot mean?
You arranged it for yourself to make sense of it, but no need to rationalise it. It's only good, cause you're used to it, or doesn't "feel more human" than Celsius.
I've been in a sauna with 100°C ( what's that? 250°F?) It's doable, but that's probably my personal max. So 100°C air temp is now 100%? Mmmh doesn't really work that great.
All in all, temperature unit is just data points, the interpretation is individual. Fahrenheit is not "more suitable for humans" than any other unit.
Fahrenheit is nice for the ten degree ranges when talking. "Tomorrow it will be in the 70s". The entire range of the 70-79 is fairly nice and similar. Every ten degree range is meaningful and different. "Tomorrow it's in the 90s! :("
Having used a lot of Celsius and metric in college sciences, they don’t bother me so much. But when it comes to certain applications, I’m more used to farenheight. For example temperature as it relates to human comfort.
Like I know 35 c is hot, and anything in the 40+ is miserable. But I also know I prefer temperatures to be in the 72-75 range for optimum comfort and thus have to do a bit of math if I need that in Celsius.
Same the other way around. I (european) regularly read about "100 degrees weather" somewhere in the US and my first thought always is "damn, that's as hot as boiling water".
We don't even need that for weather. There's not that much of a difference between 21 and 22 C, and anyway with wind and shade you can quickly have a difference of a few degrees.
I will be controversial and say that I think Fahrenheit makes more sense when talking about the weather. Its scale simply makes more sense on human terms: 0 is fucking cold, 100 is fucking hot. This is about the tempurature range you can expect to experience between winter and summer throughout much of the world.
Celsius makes more sense for cooking (and everything else) since its scale is calibrated around the phase changes of water.
Celcius really isn't that hard to get used to if you stop getting hung up on conversions and just live in it for a while. Faherenheit also isn't as hard to get used to as people meme it to be. It's all about what you've spent a significant enough time in to get the data points for how stuff feels to you.
Either scale would be second nature to anyone after a year in a new home. I made the change np. I never do conversion math, I just know what it feels like outside and can ballpark the number I remember having a similar feeling in the other place. It's really not a big deal and not worth all the internet yelling that goes on about it.
Celsius is easy, everything important is a nice and rounded number: -40°C is freezing point of vodka; -30°C is fucking cold; -20°C is cold but tolerable; -10°C is pleasant winter weather; 0°C is when roads get icy, better be careful; 10°C is pleasant autumn weather; 20°C is room temperature and pleasant spring/summer; 30°C is haaawwt; 40°C is you-must-be-shitting-me hot; 80 to 100°C is good sauna; 110°C is those-crazy-Finns sauna; 120°C is the-bloody-Russians-joined-the-sauna-party; 250°C is pizza oven; 1000°C is ceramics oven; 1500°C is steel smelting. Everything above use K instead; substract 273 to get C if you must.
Fahrenheit is a fucking mess where nothing makes sense and nothing is a rounded number.
These numbers feel arbitrary to me, while a scale of 0 to 100 feels very intuitive.
The only “arbitrary” number to remember in Fahrenheit when talking about weather is the freezing point, 32 degrees.
It’s the natural intuitiveness of 0-100 scales that also makes me prefer Celsius for non-weather applications, since the phase changes of water become more important when talking about cooking or chemistry.
It just depends on what you are used to - Fahrenheit to you makes perfect intuitive sense, I however am fully used to Celsius and that makes perfect sense to me.
Fahrenheit is too granular, imo. In day to day life I almost always hear people talk about it in ranges of temperature (eg. "mid 70s") which defeats the point of having a more granular system.
Except you don't actually need that level of accuracy when talking about temperatures humans experience.
For example, has the ability to identify outside temperature of 72 fahrenheit, not 71 fahrenheit, ever made a single bit of difference to any persons day to day experience? I really can't believe that would be true.
Places that use Celsius have no problem referring to temperatures for weather so the argument that farhenheit scale is superior due to more precision doesn't hold up.
The best temperature scale for weather is always going to be the one that everyone in that area is familiar with and nothing more than that.