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
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.
so if someone asks if a towel is dry do you say "actually dryness is not something a towel can possess itself, only give to other things"
a towel is not water. dryness is not wetness.
you're using the association fallacy and the false equivalence fallacies again, which is how you're wrong.
no its you being a hypocrite, which is why you are wrong
water is wet, and everything you try saying how it "only gives wetness but doesnt have it" just further is proving how water is wet. because everything that touches it becomes wet, besides water, because ita already wet
downpunxx@fedia.io to 
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
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.
and, for that, you'll always be wrong.
so if someone asks if a towel is dry do you say "actually dryness is not something a towel can possess itself, only give to other things"
a towel is not water. dryness is not wetness.
you're using the association fallacy and the false equivalence fallacies again, which is how you're wrong.
no its you being a hypocrite, which is why you are wrong
water is wet, and everything you try saying how it "only gives wetness but doesnt have it" just further is proving how water is wet. because everything that touches it becomes wet, besides water, because ita already wet