Instigator / Pro
8
1470
rating
50
debates
40.0%
won
Topic
#2141

Water is NOT wet

Status
Finished

The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.

Winner & statistics
Better arguments
0
6
Better sources
4
4
Better legibility
2
2
Better conduct
2
2

After 2 votes and with 6 points ahead, the winner is...

Death23
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
3
Time for argument
Two days
Max argument characters
10,000
Voting period
One week
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Open
Contender / Con
14
1553
rating
24
debates
56.25%
won
Description

Again, ask for definitions if you are confused.

Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Better arguments
3 point(s)
Better sources
2 point(s)
Better legibility
1 point(s)
Better conduct
1 point(s)
Reason:

Did not advance beyond a definition game, but con was able to show that by pro's own offered definition if water consists of water it is wet. Once that is in place, everything else feels like special pleading.

Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Better arguments
3 point(s)
Better sources
2 point(s)
Better legibility
1 point(s)
Better conduct
1 point(s)
Reason:

R1 con won with the argument pro argues about something to be wet liquids should be integrated within the subject. There was no BOP provided that challenged the properties of liquids and their wetting properties. A liquid may itself be wet but need not necessarily make the object it interacts with wet. Eg:- Oil and water both are immisible and will form layers rather than interacting with eat other. PRO 's argument that humans consist of 60% water and thus humans are wet make no sense to me. A water balloon has water its inside it, does not mean it is wet.
PRO could have won had he bother to search few facts such as:
Water does not wet waxed surfaces because the cohesive forces within the drops are stronger than the adhesive forces between the drops and the wax.
All CON had to do was refute PRO , he did and he won, according to me.