wind chill factor

[randoskier]

yup, wind-chill is nonsense. to prove it, all you need to do is pick a nice 15F degree day, hop in your car and hit the highway. stick your bare arm out the window for an hour at 60mph. no problem at all. its 15F degrees. if your hand gets cold thats your own damn fault for not being tough enough.

In that case your hand obviously feels colder because of the wind. That has nothing to do with the expression of wind chill factor in a statistical sense, nobody is suggesting you will feel warmer on a cold day with the wind blowing than on a cold day that is still. The statistic of "wind chill factor" (and heat index) are both flawed BS "feels like" stats.

[randoskier]

It can be of some use, as long as you understand what it measures. It's pretty intuitive but I prefer "cold, f*cking cold and really f*cking cold".
It's particularly helpful to calculate your time of useful consciousness as you stumble, intoxicated, from the hot tub to the sauna.

The point at which balls freeze off a brass monkey is also good info, if you are in an 1800's shootout between naval vessels.

Sadly, "freezing the balls off a brass monkey" is in the category of "military humor", rather than historical fact.
Still, it does communicate your likelihood of staying comfortable in flip flops and a light coat of oil.

That is science I am aboard with!

[TallGrass]

NOAA/NWS and predecessors (e.g. ESSA) based in Silver Spring, MD found "familiar terms" were more useful than data and percentages, i.e. "Don't tell me the Relative Humidity and Barometer reading, tell me if I need to take an umbrella to work!" This came out of research done in the infancy of the National Weather Radio (now NOAA WR).

In fact, those terms are tied to numbers where
"Breezy" is 15-25 mph wind
"Mostly Cloudy" is 5/8 - 7/8 Opaque Cloud Coverage
"Chance" of rain is used for uncertainty and "Scattered" for area when the Prob' of Precip' Percent is 30-50%
and "This afternoon" is Noon - 6pm
https://www.weather.gov/bgm/forecast_terms


The sum of articles you post ("see below") is basically NOT that wind chill is not a thing, rather that the first iteration, an equation from circa 1945 by Antarctic explorers Siple and Passel expressed in Watts/meter, was too obtuse;
that publishing these numbers in the 1970s in Canada (1,200... 1,600) "meant little to the average person";
that weathermen's attempts to convert that into a more user-friendly "feels like" temperature were accurate enough;
that the 2001 re-vamp (Osczevski and Bluestein) was still not accurate enough;
and that UTCI should be used because it is better...

Calculate your UTCI by simply inputting:
Air temperature Ta in ° Celsius
Δ Tmrt = Tmrt - Ta in Kelvin
Water vapour pressure in hPa
Rel. humidity RH %
and Wind speed v in 10m in m/s
That is simpler?
And means more "to the average person"?

Other issues the article contends is it (Osczevski and Bluestein) is based on a guy of X height, with Y face, under Z conditions.

So what do you, Randoskier, expect weathermen to broadcast:
- An equation where each person watching can enter their own biometrics?
- No "wind chill advisory" to be given and risk more cold-weather injuries and fatalities?
- People to go out with no Empirically Stated Degree of Risk in cold weather?
- A 7-Dimensional Table versus a 2-D (temp x wind speed) one?
- Or is this just a complaint that poses no alternatives because you are not interested in Solutions (progress) rather just want the emotional support of Being Listened To (catharsis; whining)?
- Or a complaint that "things are not perfect to my standards, and thus things should be done away with until perfection (in contrast to utility) can be achieved?


Instead of complaining about the food, why not offer a better dish that satisfies all the requirements and variables* ?

* various body types, Watts lost, accounts for wind speed/humidity/temp, is "user friendly" for and means something to "the average person"

TL,DR: Randoskier, is there anything in your posts in this thread that you expect will be of utility to others?
If so, state what and how, please.
If not, then why post?


the "see below"

Anti-American bias? Plllllease. People who are Anti-American wish America harm. ... Perhaps your knee-jerk nationalism

By that logic, people who are Anti-NewYorkYankees wish them harm, versus just rooting for the Red Sox or Mets. "knee-jerk nationalism"? Does that come after state-ism, county-ism, municipality-ism, frontporch-ism, and before continent-ism, globalism, solarsystem-ism, milkyway-ism, ... Or is it to distinguish from "elbow-jerk nationalism" or "free-heel nationalism"?

A fellow New Yorker sorts out heat index- https://www.gawker.com/the-heat-index-m ... -839576591

So you're a New Yorker (city or state, because upstaters make a distinction)? Is that why you consider e-tabloids on par with scientific research?

Most ranchers in Montana these days hail from Hollywood

According to Montana Dept. of Agriculture or ^Gawker.com^ ?

Well said...
https://slate.com/technology/2019/01/wi ... eless.html
https://www.vox.com/2016/1/19/10788306/ ... ll-meaning

So Slate.com and Vox.com (in addition to Gawker.com) are the 'reference materials' for you Wind Chill claims?

[mca80]

better reaponse, @TallGrass, than I could do.

[randoskier]

NOAA/NWS and predecessors (e.g. ESSA) based in Silver Spring, MD found "familiar terms" were more useful than data and percentages, i.e. "Don't tell me the Relative Humidity and Barometer reading, tell me if I need to take an umbrella to work!" This came out of research done in the infancy of the National Weather Radio (now NOAA WR).

In fact, those terms are tied to numbers where
"Breezy" is 15-25 mph wind
"Mostly Cloudy" is 5/8 - 7/8 Opaque Cloud Coverage
"Chance" of rain is used for uncertainty and "Scattered" for area when the Prob' of Precip' Percent is 30-50%
and "This afternoon" is Noon - 6pm
https://www.weather.gov/bgm/forecast_terms


The sum of articles you post ("see below") is basically NOT that wind chill is not a thing, rather that the first iteration, an equation from circa 1945 by Antarctic explorers Siple and Passel expressed in Watts/meter, was too obtuse;
that publishing these numbers in the 1970s in Canada (1,200... 1,600) "meant little to the average person";
that weathermen's attempts to convert that into a more user-friendly "feels like" temperature were accurate enough;
that the 2001 re-vamp (Osczevski and Bluestein) was still not accurate enough;
and that UTCI should be used because it is better...

Calculate your UTCI by simply inputting:
Air temperature Ta in ° Celsius
Δ Tmrt = Tmrt - Ta in Kelvin
Water vapour pressure in hPa
Rel. humidity RH %
and Wind speed v in 10m in m/s
That is simpler?
And means more "to the average person"?

Other issues the article contends is it (Osczevski and Bluestein) is based on a guy of X height, with Y face, under Z conditions.

So what do you, Randoskier, expect weathermen to broadcast:
- An equation where each person watching can enter their own biometrics?
- No "wind chill advisory" to be given and risk more cold-weather injuries and fatalities?
- People to go out with no Empirically Stated Degree of Risk in cold weather?
- A 7-Dimensional Table versus a 2-D (temp x wind speed) one?
- Or is this just a complaint that poses no alternatives because you are not interested in Solutions (progress) rather just want the emotional support of Being Listened To (catharsis; whining)?
- Or a complaint that "things are not perfect to my standards, and thus things should be done away with until perfection (in contrast to utility) can be achieved?


Instead of complaining about the food, why not offer a better dish that satisfies all the requirements and variables* ?

* various body types, Watts lost, accounts for wind speed/humidity/temp, is "user friendly" for and means something to "the average person"

TL,DR: Randoskier, is there anything in your posts in this thread that you expect will be of utility to others?
If so, state what and how, please.
If not, then why post?


the "see below"

Anti-American bias? Plllllease. People who are Anti-American wish America harm. ... Perhaps your knee-jerk nationalism

By that logic, people who are Anti-NewYorkYankees wish them harm, versus just rooting for the Red Sox or Mets. "knee-jerk nationalism"? Does that come after state-ism, county-ism, municipality-ism, frontporch-ism, and before continent-ism, globalism, solarsystem-ism, milkyway-ism, ... Or is it to distinguish from "elbow-jerk nationalism" or "free-heel nationalism"?

A fellow New Yorker sorts out heat index- https://www.gawker.com/the-heat-index-m ... -839576591

So you're a New Yorker (city or state, because upstaters make a distinction)? Is that why you consider e-tabloids on par with scientific research?

Most ranchers in Montana these days hail from Hollywood

According to Montana Dept. of Agriculture or ^Gawker.com^ ?

Well said...
https://slate.com/technology/2019/01/wi ... eless.html
https://www.vox.com/2016/1/19/10788306/ ... ll-meaning

So Slate.com and Vox.com (in addition to Gawker.com) are the 'reference materials' for you Wind Chill claims?

Don't bring the Mets into this! They will easily win this season's World Series (even if the heat index is high in August).

City not "upstate"- maybe they have wind chill up there, who knows?

I have not seen you dispute one fact that was presented in either of those articles both written by credible experienced, respected journalists. Joseph Stromberg who wrote the Vox article was a staff writer at The Smithsonian previously and he is now an Internal Medicine Resident at UNC.

"NOAA/NWS and predecessors (e.g. ESSA) based in Silver Spring, MD found "familiar terms" were more useful than data and percentages, i.e. "Don't tell me the Relative Humidity and Barometer reading, tell me if I need to take an umbrella to work!" " < So Republicans/flat-earthers can understand it?

Tonight's forecast: dark with increasing light towards morning. Perhaps NOAA should have just hired George Carlin?

There is a saying that Norwegians are born with skis on their feet, in your case I would venture that you were born with words in your mouth. Your verbosity is only matched by your vapidity. Please try to control your emotions and speak to the facts. You are coming across like a hysterical little girl. If you have some secret knowledge on how wind chill is an accurate scientific statistic please spill the beans. Enquiring minds want to know.

[randoskier]

@TallGrass "So what do you, Randoskier, expect weathermen to broadcast:"

Norway (as with most countries) does fine with windspeed in m/s, avalanche risk, wind direction, temperature and precipitation. No need for some silly index.

https://www.yr.no/nb/v%C3%A6rvarsel/dag ... k/Katterat

BTW Red Sox fans DO wish the Mets harm.

[mca80]

@TallGrass "So what do you, Randoskier, expect weathermen to broadcast:"

Norway (as with most countries) does fine with windspeed in m/s, avalanche risk, wind direction, temperature and precipitation. No need for some silly index.

https://www.yr.no/nb/v%C3%A6rvarsel/dag ... k/Katterat

So your whole complaint is with trying to simplify a measure of temp + wind which is not terribly accurate but still provides benefitial information to millions of people? Don't you have better things to complain about?

[bauerb]

@rando are you saying that girls are more hysterical than boys? or that girls are more susceptible to windchill than boys? you've lost me there. I normally avoid implying any character differences between men/woman or boys/girls, but you do you.

[randoskier]

@rando are you saying that girls are more hysterical than boys? or that girls are more susceptible to windchill than boys? you've lost me there. I normally avoid implying any character differences between men/woman or boys/girls, but you do you.

Females are far more susceptible to cold than males for obvious physiological reasons.

Yes, I have observed profound character differences between the two sexes.

Also men like cigars better.

[mca80]

So for data we have "i have observed" plus gawker, slate and vox. Solid data.