• EleventhHour@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    4 months ago

    Hence the fallacies.

    Also, fire doesn’t have to touch anything it order to heat— unlike liquids.

              • EleventhHour@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                4 months ago

                Nope. Wetness is something water can only give to other things, not itself or other liquids.

                Water is not wet. And no matter how you try to reason through this, you will continue to be wrong.

                • BigBananaDealer@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  it cant make other liquids wet because its already wet by nature. thats just what liquids are. no matter how many times you tell me im wrong, i’ll always know you are wrong

                  • EleventhHour@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    4 months ago

                    it cant make other liquids wet because its already wet by nature

                    incorrect. this is the association fallacy-- you cannot prove it is wet other than through fallacy. wetness is only a property it can give to other things, not a property it possesses itself. water can’t be wet simply because it makes something else wet.

                    therefore, you are wrong.

                    no matter how many times you tell me im wrong, i’ll always know you are wrong

                    and, for that, you’ll always be wrong.