No it isn't. It's an arbitrary division based on depth. Nothing more.

I think you should maybe read the whole post before you respond to stuff, because I wasn't nearly finished there. Unless you're okay with looking silly, because you're responding to arguments I've never made.

No you didn't. In fact, you're laughably ignorant of how water works and behaves.

I'm really not, though--you've convinced yourself that I am because of a few simple misinterpretations on your part, but that has nothing to do with me. You think I'm arguing hat the ocean is divided--I literally never said it was. I posted a diagram of a body of water that had lines on it, and you think that's me trying to say that the body is divided. Because you're not very bright, and you can't read very well.

It absolutely does mean shit since water does not sit on top of itself. This is super basic fucking kid shit.

Cool. So, can you point out where I denied that, please?

And can you also explain how the fact that water doesn't sit on top of itself somehow proves that water can't be wet?

Are you aware that you're making my own arguments for me? That you're proving me right?

You'd be wet. There would be a large amount of water on you. Millions of parts that form a whole.

OH, really? All of the water on me forms a whole? Is that why some of it is dripping off in individual drops? Because it's a whole? Is that something that a whole does? It breaks apart?

This is the part where you just admit that you're being stupid and just give up, or admit that I'm right or something. I'd say this is looking pretty bad for you right now.

We're talking about liquid, not solids. Solids, unlike liquids, can stack and sit on top of each other.

My point is that it literally doesn't matter what state of matter it is. You can stack gas molecules onto each other if you try hard enough. Ever heard of a particle accelerator? You probably call it an atom smasher. I think that's what stupid people call them.

It has nothing to do with language, it's about how water does not separately sit on itself. It moves and mixes.

Wow, very good challenger! "It moves, and it mixes." Awesome. You figured it out.

I'll just wait for you to respond to the previous questions, then--when did I ever suggest that water doesn't move, and how does the free movement of water demonstrate that water cannot be wet?

Why are you bringing up dust when we're talking about water, and how it isn't wet? It's simply a liquid. It's water.

Hmm! Do you know what an analogy is? It's a comparison between two like subjects, commonly used as a rhetorical device to help illustrate a point to less educated people.

I'm simply saying that there are no "wholes." There are only particles and rudimentary constituents.

Once you establish that there are no wholes, the fact that water is wet becomes academic. You can no longer play the "whole" card anymore. You're forced to observe the molecules themselves. And what the molecules themselves show is that for every body of water, there are some molecules that are filling the bottom of the glass, and there are some molecules that are near the top of the glass. And everywhere in between.

And yeah, boy genius--they move around. But that literally doesn't mean anything. Lots of things move around. They can still be wet.

You clearly tried to say water stacks

Nope.

you for some reason think this is about semantics

Uh, no, I don't. That's you.

LOL If you were trying to make another point you would've said so just now and called me an idiot for not being able to read your post.

You didn't, however, because you know damn well what I called you out on was EXACTLY what you were trying to do. "hurr how is water divided if it's a whole lel get rekt"

Bro

Right. You done chimping out?

This entire thread where you literally said water sits on itself?

Yeah, show me the post where I said that.  Simple request. Can you do that for me?

I'm not. You're doing that for me. You haven't once yet proven in any way that water can be wet. Your only argument has been that "water molecules" are always separate and can never form a whole, wholes don't even exist in the first place (fucking LOL), and that water is wet because it is wet with billions of other "water molecules".

And you can't refute any of that.

Except it shows that you don't understand basic science.

It's not even a discussion of science--it's metaphysics, and I'm sorry, but you're the moron here. I've shown this argument to many philosophy students already. They're all laughing at you. You're being laughed at.

LOL HOLY SHIT

THE GRASPING IS REAL

Except that's really not grasping at all, because if you want to stack two gas molecules together, that's literally how you would do it. I'm glad you're learning something from this.

Because adding water to water does not wet the other water. It just adds to the volume of the other water. Nothing got wet. It's water.

You're right, because water is already wet. Because it's in a perpetual state of wetness. You're 100% right--that's one of the first things I said, too.

If you had one water molecule and you poured a glass of water over it, you just made that singular molecule wet.

The problem here is you're talking about solids when you agreed with me we're talking about liquid, specifically water and how it is not wet.

Replace what I said with "water droplets" and not a single thing changes. Please keep your autism in check.

If you're going to make shitty examples because you can't back up your argument with hard science, you only make yourself appear uneducated.

You shouldn't even be allowed to use the term "hard science."

http://sciencenetlinks.com/lessons/exploring-parts-and-wholes/

404 Error: Page Not Found

Good job. I'm sure it was some brilliant shit, too. Maybe it was written by the same nutjob who thinks plants feel pain.

Except water.

And you've failed conclusively to demonstrate this, unsurprisingly.

Use ctrl+F

Did you do what I asked? Did you find a post that says the water molecules are "sitting" on top of each other?

Or did you just find a post that says they're on top of each other.

Do you understand that those are two different assertions?

FUCKING LOL

This is basic fucking kid's science.

It's basic metaphysics and you're getting it wrong.

If you're autistic enough to show random people at your school an argument you're having on the Internet then lmao. I couldn't care less what philosophy students think about anything, they're basically studying nothing.

They know more about the subject than you ever will, is the point. There's really nothing autistic about it--I show my classmates funny shit all the time. You're right, though--not all of them are laughing. Some of them are cringing.

No, the point is you're talking about that as if it's relevant.

It's relevant because it destroys everything about your argument. You can stack anything together if you try hard enough.

No, because it's a liquid.

No you haven't. You've just added more liquid.

Do you understand that these aren't arguments? Do you understand that what you've been doing over the past three or fur years--probably longer--does not count as an argument? Repeating your shitty incorrect viewpoints over and over again?

Or is it because you're embarrassed that you have the understanding levels of a small child.

Got it to work. As I expected, it does nothing to prove me wrong. Helps my argument, actually.

What a time to be alive.

Jesus Christ what is wrong with you people

Well, Verb has a nihilistic superiority complex and Chally just can't help but flex his intelligence in the form of taking the bait.

Oh but how I wish it was actually bait.

So anyway I'm thinking, since water is wet, and humans are mostly made of water, that means every girl I meet is wet whenever they see me.

I like this logic. It's good logic.

Holy shit are you fucking idiots still arguing over this?

day two of the historic verbatim/challenger water debate

Well it's as if you're denying grass is green. It's green. End of story.

Technically green is the only color rejected by it so the color you're seeing is the color grass is not, and the human brain is merely tricked into thinking it's green 'cause light is some bullshit, but that's neither here nor there.

That was an entertaining read. Thanks.

I got a shout out

Like vaccines, this one thread has given me autism

But Desty, what if I made it my job to be an extra in the background of other people's lives?

Are you seriously asking me to tell you how to live your life?