Fahrenheit is still the best way to take the temperature - Celsius just doesn't measure up

The National's Cody Combs says that Fahrenheit is wrongly critiqued and should, instead, be celebrated. AP

Besides my affinity for iMessage and disdain for WhatsApp, one of the most American things about me is probably my strong feelings for the Fahrenheit temperature scale.

I can see eyes rolling and hear audible sighs as I type this, but trust me when I say that this isn’t just a matter of me stubbornly sticking with something I grew up with.

Despite learning about much of the world's disdain for Fahrenheit as I got older, I’ve done my level best to make an informed decision on the matter.

I’ll make one concession. Celsius is great for science. But, broadly speaking, Fahrenheit is better for what most of us look for in measuring temperatures, and that’s answering the question “What does it feel like outside?” The plentiful increments provided by Fahrenheit compared to Celsius make it more descriptive.

For several years, I lived in the UAE, and as the temperatures in the Emirates are relatively consistent, I can understand why Fahrenheit’s advantages might seem minimal. But for much of the rest of the world, where temperatures are far more volatile (and increasingly so, thanks to climate change), Fahrenheit gives you a better way to gauge what it actually feels like outside. When you're deciding whether or not you need to bundle up and to what extent you need to bundle up, the wider range in temperatures helps you make an informed decision that can make a world of difference between comfort and absolute, frostbitten misery.

When the seasons change in many parts of the US, I should also point out that the variance provided by Fahrenheit comes in handy when both snow flurries and oppressive heat can sometimes be experienced in the same day. Unlike Celsius, Fahrenheit provides precision that can really help you prepare for the day in terms of clothing and comfort.

The keyword here is precision. Far too many Celsius aficionados sometimes scoff and wrongly accuse me of claiming that Fahrenheit is more accurate. I'm not saying it's more accurate. That would be silly. I am, however, saying that it provides clarity that Celsius can't match.

The Fahrenheit-bashing community has occasionally pointed out that Celsius can easily provide the precision I'm seeking by making use of decimals, but who needs decimals when scale provided by Fahrenheit is so plentiful?

Perhaps one of the most frustrating parts of defending Fahrenheit in many of my spirited arguments with colleagues, friends and in rare cases, strangers who strongly support Celsius stems from what I would call an exacerbated argument.

A US park ranger takes a surface temperature reading from an unofficial thermometer at Furnace Creek Visitor Centre in Death Valley National Park, California. AFP

"Okay but the rest of the world uses Celsius and it's just annoying that you don't," they often say.

Fair enough, it might be annoying, irritating and inconvenient at times – but none of those are arguments on the merits.

I would also point out that occasionally in the fields of science and in countless instances throughout history, being annoying has been critical to the progress of our species.

In this instance for making my case for Fahrenheit, I think back to a quote that's often attributed to Irish playwright George Bernard Shaw.

"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world: the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself ... therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man," he said.

If you’re still sceptical, I completely understand. It’s tough to overcome a system – in this instance, Celsius – once it becomes standardised around the world.

I will make one final plea, however.

It’s a classic life lesson bestowed upon me in my childhood on many occasions when my first reaction might have been to scoff at a different idea or proposal. Don’t knock it until you’ve tried it.

By simply classifying the use of Fahrenheit as a US idiosyncrasy, those critics of the temperature scale are, ironically enough, acting in a way that, yes, US residents and policy makers often act: stubbornly.

All of this, of course, deserves lengthy debate and a historical deep dive to really help one make an informed temperature scale decision. I didn't touch upon the motives of Daniel Gabriel Fahrenheit, the physicist who ultimately created the temperature system of which I'm such a fan.

For all its detractors and despite being relegated to niche usage in the US and various US protectorates like Guam, Puerto Rico and American Samoa, but also Liberia, Fahrenheit has managed to survive. It's worth considering why.