id argue its the same as saying fire isnt hot, just whatever fire touches becomes hot
And you would be wrong. That is called the Association fallacy and false equivalence fallacy.
Fire is not a liquid.
i didnt say it was a liquid
Hence the fallacies.
Also, fire doesn’t have to touch anything it order to heat— unlike liquids.
liquids which are......wet
Again, no. Wetness is a property liquids give to other things.
so if wetness is only something a liquid can give......what does that make the liquid?
wet.
Still no wetness is only something a liquid can give to something else, a solid.
because a liquid is wet
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.
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
downpunxx@fedia.io to 
like water
Not at all
id argue its the same as saying fire isnt hot, just whatever fire touches becomes hot
And you would be wrong. That is called the Association fallacy and false equivalence fallacy.
Fire is not a liquid.
i didnt say it was a liquid
Hence the fallacies.
Also, fire doesn’t have to touch anything it order to heat— unlike liquids.
liquids which are......wet
Again, no. Wetness is a property liquids give to other things.
so if wetness is only something a liquid can give......what does that make the liquid?
wet.
Still no wetness is only something a liquid can give to something else, a solid.
because a liquid is wet
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.
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