downpunxx@fedia.io to Lemmy Shitpost@lemmy.world · 4 个月前gotdamnfedia.ioimagemessage-square206fedilinkarrow-up11.26Karrow-down125
arrow-up11.23Karrow-down1imagegotdamnfedia.iodownpunxx@fedia.io to Lemmy Shitpost@lemmy.world · 4 个月前message-square206fedilink
minus-squareBigBananaDealer@lemm.eelinkfedilinkarrow-up2arrow-down2·4 个月前id argue its the same as saying fire isnt hot, just whatever fire touches becomes hot
minus-squareEleventhHour@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up2arrow-down2·edit-24 个月前And you would be wrong. That is called the Association fallacy and false equivalence fallacy. Fire is not a liquid.
minus-squareEleventhHour@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up2arrow-down2·4 个月前Hence the fallacies. Also, fire doesn’t have to touch anything it order to heat— unlike liquids.
minus-squareEleventhHour@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up2arrow-down1·4 个月前Again, no. Wetness is a property liquids give to other things.
minus-squareBigBananaDealer@lemm.eelinkfedilinkarrow-up3arrow-down2·4 个月前so if wetness is only something a liquid can give…what does that make the liquid? wet.
minus-squareEleventhHour@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up2·4 个月前Still no wetness is only something a liquid can give to something else, a solid.
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.