I must say I didnt quite understand how explanation differs from description (other than that the former encompasses the latter, but not vice-versa). What should be added to a description to make it an explanation?
But, and here is the interesting part, if that response was not quite satisfactory then reflect for a moment why. I'll wait. (Done!? Wow you're quick!) That response was a description of one aspect of the difference between a description and an explanation and not an explanation.
As to an explanation it actually consists of, in part, descriptions so sometimes it's a little difficult to see at times. So it's understandable to be somewhat confused.
Let's say you come home and a friend that is staying over, unbeknown to you, has a tea kettle on and it's whistling. You hear a whistling sound and give you're friend a curious look and they reply, 'It's coming from the tea kettle.' That would be a description.
An explanation would go something like this: Heat excites the molecules of water increasing the space between them, causing the steam to take up more space than the water and cooled air did. That builds pressure... etc.
The short answer is that a description has detail and an explanation also has reason.
Does that help?
I frequently find that some people (intelligent people mind you) struggle with this concept. I am always looking for better ways to explain it and your input might help.
In the meantime read my other response[1] to the same question in this very thread.
Thanks.