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.
You falsely compared to water to fire and sugar. Water is neither fire nor sugar. Water has none of the properties of fire nor sugar. You are clearly very confused about what water is and what sugar and fire are.
You blamed your “brain” for this. Repeatedly.
May you and your “brain” have a speedy recovery as you ponder how water is not wet, it just makes other 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)_/¯
i havent falsely compared water. and i am not confused. it is pretty obvious if youve been around water that it is wet
You falsely compared to water to fire and sugar. Water is neither fire nor sugar. Water has none of the properties of fire nor sugar. You are clearly very confused about what water is and what sugar and fire are.
You blamed your “brain” for this. Repeatedly.
May you and your “brain” have a speedy recovery as you ponder how water is not wet, it just makes other things wet.
you still dont know what a comparison is. and now you make fun of my intellect. you are out of ideas