I agree - scales are much easier to use when everything goes in nice segments of tens. For example, take a look at this prototype temperature scale I've developed:

30 - It's freezing
40 - Still quite cold
50 - Cold
60 - Bearable if it isn't wet or windy
70 - Nice
80 - Warm
90 - Warmer
100 - Too hot

Now keep in mind it's just a prototype (still not sure if it should start at 30), but I hope that you, as a fellow decimal-system connoisseur, will agree that this is a perfectly adequate system for measuring temperature.

As an American, I'm sorry our football scoring has you flummoxed. I think you'll be most pleased to note that I take no part in these shenanigans - no sir, I'm a cricket man myself. Give me the good old one run is 1 added to the score...except when you hit the ball out of bounds, in which case it's 4...unless the ball is still in the air, in which case it's 6...ahem, point being that these measuring systems (present due to differences in culture) cannot be classified as "better" or "worse" - only different. You are right in saying "the only reason it makes sense is that you're used to it", but the fact goes both ways. Cricket is not a better game than American Football, it's a different game.

Systems only become "better" or "worse" depending on how many people use them. And before you start defending Celsius because 0 is freezing and 100 is boiling, let me draw attention to the fact that base 10 is just another human system, only regarded as "good" because everyone uses it.

Apparently there are no fertile researchers at the Scripps Research Institute?

TFA is about English, so I feel partially justified:

Just for the record, a word cannot simultaneously be shorter and longer than another word. There, now I'm satisfied. (Also, "there are" instead of "there's". Now I'm really satisfied. And it's not from the stewardess porn.)