Nah, water isn’t wet, it just makes other things wet. It’s unfortunate that this upsets you to the point that you have to make up stories about me and that you have amnesia about the things you’ve said— that you even confuse water with sugar and fire. You must be in quite the twist.
its not ive forgotten but my brain just made my memories get forgotten. but i havent forgotten lets get that straight
and if it is just water, why go through all the trouble of convincing that it isnt wet? feels we are just arguing the meaning of the word wet and not the word that can describe water the best (which is wet)
its not ive forgotten but my brain just made my memories get forgotten. but i havent forgotten lets get that straight
So… you didn’t forget… your brain forgot? lol
And I’m not trying to convince you of anything— I’m just correcting you. It’s you who have been trying all the convincing with your logical fallacies, acting like water is the same as fire or sugar. Then I have to correct you again by informing you that water is not sugar or fire. I’ve had to do that more than once now.
Since you are so confused, I suggest you take a rest. Water isn’t wet. It just makes things wet.
water is wet. because it makes things wet. and you seem to not grasp what a comparison is either. i never said fire or sugar was water i was comparing your logic to something else
and my first point is basically what is being said about water “not being wet” it is yet another comparison, as in i didnt forget my brain made me forget. water isnt wet it just makes things wet. comparison
One again, I must correct you and - apparently - your brain that makes you forget things.
Water is not wet; it just makes things wet. The transitive property of math does not apply to water because water is not math. (Another thing water is not).
You seem increasingly confused, blaming your “brain” for your mistakes. I suggest giving your “brain” a nice rest.
Once again, it’s a false equivalence logical fallacy— neither sugar nor fire are water, and there is no reason to believe they would act like water. Especially considering that water is not wet, it just makes things wet.
This seems to be causing you quite a bit of distress and memory problems. I suggest a rest.
Nah, water isn’t wet, it just makes other things wet. It’s unfortunate that this upsets you to the point that you have to make up stories about me and that you have amnesia about the things you’ve said— that you even confuse water with sugar and fire. You must be in quite the twist.
Relax. It’s just water.
its not ive forgotten but my brain just made my memories get forgotten. but i havent forgotten lets get that straight
and if it is just water, why go through all the trouble of convincing that it isnt wet? feels we are just arguing the meaning of the word wet and not the word that can describe water the best (which is wet)
So… you didn’t forget… your brain forgot? lol
And I’m not trying to convince you of anything— I’m just correcting you. It’s you who have been trying all the convincing with your logical fallacies, acting like water is the same as fire or sugar. Then I have to correct you again by informing you that water is not sugar or fire. I’ve had to do that more than once now.
Since you are so confused, I suggest you take a rest. Water isn’t wet. It just makes things wet.
water is wet. because it makes things wet. and you seem to not grasp what a comparison is either. i never said fire or sugar was water i was comparing your logic to something else
and my first point is basically what is being said about water “not being wet” it is yet another comparison, as in i didnt forget my brain made me forget. water isnt wet it just makes things wet. comparison
One again, I must correct you and - apparently - your brain that makes you forget things.
Water is not wet; it just makes things wet. The transitive property of math does not apply to water because water is not math. (Another thing water is not).
You seem increasingly confused, blaming your “brain” for your mistakes. I suggest giving your “brain” a nice rest.
once again, i must say it was a comparison. i do not know why you take it so literal. water is wet because it makes things wet
Once again, it’s a false equivalence logical fallacy— neither sugar nor fire are water, and there is no reason to believe they would act like water. Especially considering that water is not wet, it just makes things wet.
This seems to be causing you quite a bit of distress and memory problems. I suggest a rest.
what makes water so special that it absolutely under any circumstances never be compared to anything else? the fact that its wet?
I see you’re still confused. Water isn’t wet; it just makes things wet.
And water isn’t special, either. It can be compared to lots of things— just not falsely, as you have.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯