Post by @kritischelezer@mastodon.social

2026-10-13 19:03 UTC

@kentpitman@climatejustice.social Fahrenheit is used exclusively by only a handful of countries (https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/countries-that-use-fahrenheit ) so no, changing to F is a bad idea, most people would not even know what temps we are talking about. But yes, of course I agree the discussion is dominated by politics and a little psychology, effectively used by politicians and companies just to not have to break the news that our current level of wealth and security is about to disappear. Climate change means war is in the future, imho.

Replies (2)

@kentpitman@climatejustice.social 2026-10-13 19:06

@kritischelezer@mastodon.social Well, I'll provocatively say that it would be better if people did NOT understand what the number was and only saw a larger number they didn't try to compare to their plan for whether they needed to put on a jacket to get through the day. :( And yes, war, but the awfulness of that war is made worse by delay.

Open ##5282456
@vnikolov@ieji.de 2026-10-14 08:46

Regarding ways to present changes to global temperature: I imagine only a minority of all people understand that a change of, say, one degree Celsius to the average global temperature is a rather significant change. (I don't know whether anyone has studied properly the actual extent of this understanding.) But I am sure that the situation is the same when two degrees Fahrenheit are mentioned, or even one or two degrees of temperature in an unspecified scale. A message would be effective if it is expressed in tangible terms and geared towards regional climate. Just as one example of many regarding the latter, talking about hurricanes means one thing to the people who live on the East Coast of the US and quite another to people in South-East Europe (where I live). @kritischelezer@mastodon.social @kentpitman@climatejustice.social

Open ##5282458