On Sunday, January 5, 2014 10:57:44 AM UTC-5, Gordon Shumway wrote:
On Sun, 5 Jan 2014 06:24:14 -0800 (PST), "
wrote:
On Saturday, January 4, 2014 5:01:22 PM UTC-5, Gordon Shumway wrote:
On Sat, 4 Jan 2014 11:15:56 -0800 (PST), "
wrote:
Well, no **** Sherlock. Apparently wind chill does have
an effect on an inanimate object.... And let's look at the context,
before you try to hijack it into something else. The question that
was asked was if wind chill was a consideration in pipes possibly
freezing.
"Wind chill" has no effect on inanimate objects. Period, if I may
quote our fearless leader.
BS as already proven with the simple examples:
A brick that's 75F when placed outside when it's 20F is going
to cool faster with a windchill of 0F, than with a windchill of
15F. A house is going to take more energy to keep it warm on
a night when the windchill is 0F, than when the windchill is
20F, even if the outside temp both nights is 20F. That's because
windchill has a direct bearing on how heat is removed from
any object, without regard to whether it's alive or not.
Your answer, which you apparently cling to, is that wind chill
has no effect on inanimate objects.
Wrong, as demonstrated by physics and my various examples.
Your various examples are merely demonstrating the effect of wind, not
wind chill.
You only get wind chill if there is wind. Go look at the formula
for the USA. The only components are temp and wind speed. Wind chill
cools that brick or house cited in the example.
And in the context of the discussion, I'll ask the simple question
again. If you have water pipes in a crawlspace that has some vent openings, drafts,
etc. and it's 20F outside, are those pipes more likely to freeze on
a night when the wind chill is 0F or when it's 20F?
Until you can understand the difference there is no
further point in this conversation.
Nonsense. Why would wind chill only remove heat from things that are alive?
Good grief.
If I may paraphrase another of our presidents, It's the wind, stupid.
If I may paraphrase, you're as dumb as the brick in the example.
No, I didn't contradict myself but you just did. "Wind chill" has no
effect on an inanimate object. Wind chill is just how cold ambient
temperature feels to exposed flesh.
BS. Wind chill is an index that indicates how wind and in some
cases evaporation, factors in to cooling things. Those "things"
could be you or an inaminate object that is above the outside temp.
Are you really saying that a house with no heat, there is no
reason to be more concerned on a night when the wind chill is 0F,
as opposed to 20F, even if the outside temp is the same?
Yes or no?
Failure to answer the simple, direct question noted. That's a sure
sign that you know you're wrong.
Here is my last hope at getting you to understand the difference
between "Wind" and "Wind Chill."
http://www.nws.noaa.gov/om/windchill/windchillfaq.shtml
Pay particular attention to the frequently asked question number 12.
Pay particular attention to the fact that just like you, they
contradicted themselves. Anyone can see that:
"Q: Does wind chill only apply to people and animals?
Yes. The only effect wind chill has on inanimate objects, such as car radiators and water pipes, is to more quickly cool the object to cool to the current air temperature. Object will NOT cool below the actual air temperature.. For example, if the temperature outside is -5 degrees Fahrenheit and the wind chill temperature is -31 degrees Fahrenheit, then your car's radiator will not drop lower than -5 degrees F."
First they say it only applies to people and animals, then
they say windchill does affect radiators and water pipes. Which of course
is exactly what I and other here have been saying. They say it has an
effect. What you said was:
"Wind chill" has absolutely no effect on inanimate objects."
Thanks for proving my point.