Missing the boat on two counts:
1) As I've pointed out at least twice in this thread, wind chill is based upon exposure times of bare flesh to freezing temperatures, viz. the point at which said exposed flesh freezes. This is objectively quantifiable and repeatable in controlled conditions.
The mythical "heat index" has no such objective measurements. It was cooked up
*heh* by a couple of guys at NWS (probably as a part of their PhD thesis) to try and determine the indeterminate...how people experience the heat.
From Wiki:
Heat index - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
2) Rush never claimed it was a gubmint conspiracy....That's what the moonbats at MediaMoonbats say he said.
whatever, dude.
i didn't care when i posted in this thread, and i certainly don't care now. the fat tub of goo can go on milking the not very bright among us till the cows come home.
it makes no odds to me.
You'd care if you had stated a material fact to the subject at hand.
Rush says what he says and gets wackaloons like edthebedwetter all riled up when he says it....That's his schtick.
My personal experience is training in EMS and aviation meteorology...The comparison of wind chill and "heat index" doesn't fly physiologically, nor does it
*heh* fly from an aviation standpoint....In fact, in the context of aerodynamics, the "heat index" is actually even higher, when you're mixing heat, humidity and altitude, in computing lift requited to keep the aircraft aloft...We flyboys call that one "density altitude", which is also physically reproducible and testable.
Who are we supposed to believe now?