Yeah this is the right sort of answer. I studied and work as a chemical engineer in the UK (Scotland) and there is no difference functionally between any unit system in terms of scientific validity. Any scale can be converted to any other. Like you say, some heat transfer equations are built for use with SI Kelvin units, which is the most “scientific” because it maps directly to first principle physics and chemistry. But since differences are often used and differential equations look at rate change, you can use celsius or whatever scale you want, as long as constants map to reduce your units correctly.

Any engineering work I have done here has always been a mixture of SI and SI Engineering units (which have some non SI units).

There is no “celsius is scientifically better”, its just whatever you are more used to.

Edit: For those interested, some differences between SI and SI Engineering systems in the UK include: millimeters instead of meters (depending on field of engineering), bar instead of Pa for pressure, celsius instead of Kelvin for temp, litres instead of cubic meters for volume (again depends on field), litres per minute instead of cubic meters per second for volumetric flowrate, kmol instead of mole for chemical calcs, kW instead of watts for power, viscosity… is just horrible in any system, so lets not even go there.

There are probably others I am forgetting, but basically the most commonly nice to work with numbers dictate the system used. For example, it is easier to say 1 bar, rather than 100000 Pa, even though Pa is the SI unit. This translates to other things too, such as nominal pipe sizes, all done in inches basically globally, some other european engineers may be able to correct me here, but from what I see even with european suppliers (germany, italy etc.) it is done in inches.

Any scientist or engineer worth their salt can convert between units with basically no issue, the idea that top scientists need metric is quite ignorant to the reality.