So I'm going to assume that you're just cracking a joke here right?

no

You're anecdotal experience doesn't discredit the whole system.

in this case, it does. your argument is that Fahrenheit is a 0-100 scale. it's not for me!! if what you are saying is true, then it has to be a 0 - 100 degree scale for everyone. listen, I am much more used to temperatures over 100 degrees than under 50 degrees. temperatures under 50 degrees are unusual for me, temperatures over 100 are not. I think you made it very clear that this 0-100 scale is supposed to include normal temperatures. it doesn't!

How can you say you use Fahrenheit but 0-100 means nothing to you?

because it means nothing to me!!!! what is so special about 0 degrees Fahrenheit? like, what can I possibly say? It's extremely cold, I suppose, but not exceptionally cold. I don't get why that 0 should be 0 as opposed to say -10 degrees, or 10 degrees, or even 20 degrees or 30 degrees. ok? and secondly, what is so special about 100 degrees? it's very hot, but it's not even close to the hottest it gets in the summer.

The point is that the scale is much easier to conceptualize that something that represents its reasonable extremes as -17 and 37.

ok, but here's the thing I don't think you get: 0 degrees fahrnehit and 100 degrees Fahrenheit mean nothing to people who use celsius. not only that, it means nothing to me either!! the one tiny advantage they have is that they can tell whether or not it will snow based on whether or not the weather number is negative.