On Wed, 08 Jan 2014 13:29:58 -0500, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 1/8/2014 12:29 PM, wrote:
Get real! No one has said it would (though under the right
circumstances, water will freeze when the ambient air is above
"freezing"). The *fact* is that windchill also affects inanimate
objects. The numbers quoted by the newz are for *bare* *human* skin
but the effect is relevant to all objects.
Trader keeps using specific numbers for wind chill. The numbers don't
apply to inanimate objects. Wind does carry heat away faster then when
there is no wind. No one is disputing that fact.
But it is *still* windchill. The fact is that the numbers posted in
the NEWZ only are estimates for bare human skin, so if you're going to
play the pedantic pete role, it's not accurate for even dogs (a rather
animate object).
If Trader's windchill had the same effect on inanimate objects, then a
35 degree temperature with a 20 degree windchill could freeze pipes.
Wrong. He's never said anything *close* to that.
Windchill is a "feel" and can have a value assigned to it.
Wind affects the rate of cooling
If windchill was the same for humans, animas and inanimate objects, then
pipes woujld freeze anyh time the windchill go below 32. Since they do
not, yhou can condlude they are not affected.
WRONG. You're lying, now.
Wind---yes
Windchill---NO
Wrong. It *IS* windchill. Wind is moving air. It has nothing to do
with temperature, real or imagined.
Some people just refuse to see the difference
You can't even get it straight.
Don't take my word for it
I *certainly* don't because you're *WRONG*.
With the bitterly cold air dominating our local news today, the phrase
“wind chill factor” is getting a great deal of well-deserved attention.
Some people are asking what it really means and when we started using it.
Before World War II, two scientists working in Antarctica first
developed the idea and coined the phrase. Paul Allman Siple and Charles
Passel based it on the cooling rate of a bottle of water that was
suspended above their hut. They developed a formula and made a chart
that was later released and became widely used in the 1970s. Then in
2001, the National Weather Service updated the formula used to calculate
the wind chill. That updated version is what we use today.
The idea behind the wind chill factor is to give people an idea of just
how quickly the cold temperatures mixed with the wind will affect humans
and animals alike. Frostbite and hypothermia are real dangers from
bitter cold, and the wind chill factor helps determine the level of
danger we face.
Windchill and Wind Chill Factor are different things. One is a
specific formula (or table, really). The other is an effect.
The formula takes into account the temperature and winds at five feet
above ground level, the average height of an adult’s face, which is
presumably the most exposed part of the body on a cold day. According to
the National Weather Service, it also “incorporates heat transfer
theory, heat loss from the body to its surroundings, during cold and
breezy/windy days.” The National Weather Service Windchill Chart states
that at a wind chill of about -19º, frost bite can occur in thirty
minutes. Of course, below that temperature, the colder it is, the faster
frostbite will happen.
AND IS NOT any different for animate or inanimate objects. A dog will
have a different correction than a human. If you're talking about a
specific table, so be it. That is *not* windchill. Windchill is more
general.
You might have heard all the hype surrounding the Green Bay vs. San
Francisco game yesterday. Last week, some meteorologists were predicting
the wind chill would be colder than the famed Ice Bowl of 1967. In fact,
that forecast did not pan out, partially because in the 1960s, they were
still using the older formula, which caused the calculations to be
colder than they should have been. By the old index, the wind chill for
the Ice Bowl was -47º. By the new index, it was a warmer -36. Also, the
actual temperature in Green Bay yesterday was not nearly as cold as was
feared by some late last week.
Utterly irrelevant.
Read more he
http://www.newsobserver.com/2014/01/...#storylink=cpy