The argument for Fahrenheit based on a perceived "0 to 100 scale" representing a percentage of heat can be critiqued as it misunderstands how temperature scales work. Temperature is not a percentage system; it's a measure of thermal energy. The notion that 70 degrees Fahrenheit represents "70% heat" is not scientifically accurate as it implies that temperature is a linear scale capped at 100, which it is not. The Fahrenheit scale was actually based on arbitrary points: the freezing point of brine (0°F) and the average human body temperature (96°F at the time, which has since been adjusted to 98.6°F).

Celsius, on the other hand, is based on the freezing and boiling points of water at 0°C and 100°C respectively, under standard atmospheric conditions. This makes it a decimal and scientifically consistent system that is easier to relate to the states of water, an essential reference in science and daily life.

Comparing temperatures to percentages, like test scores, is a flawed analogy because temperature doesn't have an upper limit "score" and is not designed to be read as a proportion. The scale from -18 to 38 in Celsius correlates directly with the physical properties of water, which is logical for scientific purposes.

Moreover, many argue that Celsius is more intuitive for everyday weather-related use outside of the U.S., as the scale is more granular for colder climates (where a one-degree change in Celsius is noticeable) and aligns well with the metric system, which is used globally for scientific measurement.