I remember my geology lessons from high school (it was only a few years ago), basically magma is what it's called when it's underground, lava is what it's called when it's at the surface and lava is just molten rock while magma contains some other things like dissolved gas that go away when it reaches the surface
Trilo: Hey Ben, can you believe that this comment section thinks this uptight excuse for a prosecutor is on par with anybody at our circus?! Clearly he needs a demonstration of a true performance!(Proceeds to sing Row Row Row Your Boat.) Ben: umm...h-hey trilo..I don't t-think it works like that..
The best thing is not that it hits right into home, is that he was the first one to google sonething. PS: and don't feel bad, googling sonething is better when you don't know something or aren't fully sure. As long as you check where you get the info, it's a smart thing to corroborate. Feel good we have technology.
"I did not spend my childhood watching bill nye and learning adjectives in super scribblenauts for some internet funnyman to say that water and lava are wet."
Honestly I get where you’re coming from, both sides are kinda stupid as neither of them bring anything up that makes sense. That said I myself side with the fact that lava is wet, ‘cause it is by definition wet.
My answer: It's worth noting that it is possible for a liquid to be dry. In fact, you can make liquid water dry by mixing it with silica powder, resulting in water that can't make anything wet. Water is wet due to multi-molecular hydrogen bonds. Water sticks to things due to its semi-magnetic properties. As such, I'm unsure if lava is wet, I don't think it has the same chemical properties.
Depends if wet implies a liquid or substance or just water on a surface. Also, water cannot become wet because it is a liquid, and wet state applies to solid states which has some kind of absorbance
I’d go by technically definition with wet meaning “something that has a liquid applied”. That’s why I argue that water isn’t wet because of cohesion and adhesion and the chemicals bonds you’re talking about. You put water in a table, the table is wet and forms adhesion. You put water on water and you just get water because of cohesion. It’s molecularly different. That’s why I’d argue lava isn’t wet either. Lava on lava makes more lava, lava on a table is just lava on a table.
Actually fire is burnt. It's literally everything that is burnt, fire... or rapid generation of plasma due to oxygenization of elements under high temperature circumstances is literally the formation of oxides due to combustion and as such the gas and plasma mixture is actually what is burnt.
I mean, I may be thinking about this wrong, but if fire could burn it would be an endless selfsustaining force(as long as there is oxygen) that never loses energy and expands untill there is no oxygen left in the world. Which, since it hasn't happened yet, I would assume that fire can not burn.
Favorite quote: "Did not spend my childhood watching Bill Nye and learning adjectives on Super Scribblenauts for some internet funnymen to say water and lava are wet"
@George Khoory 1) you aren't much younger than me, it really just depends on how fun your teachers are 2) Bill Nye the Science Guy is probably the reason I love science so much. He had a TV show until 1998 about really wacky science facts, experiments, and other sciencey things with a little bit of visual and audio humor thrown in. If you like chemistry, or science in general, I _highly_ suggest you look him up
But that’s because fire isn’t burnt. Fire is hot. Things that lack moisture and contain carbon get burnt, such as dry twigs, leaves, bread, bodies, paper, etc. On the other hand, things that do not contain carbon like glass, water, and rocks do not get burned, they evaporate or melt. Fire is hot, and water is wet.
Burnt is the aftermath, fire is currently burning. Water is wet, literally ONLY liquids that contain water can be wet! Your skin, absorbing the water IS WHAT WET SENSATION IS
@@Lantern_Light Hold on. How do you determine if a liquid "contains" water? Does gasoline contain water? Does chloroform? If you store pure alcohol in an air tight bottle, is the inside of the bottle not wet?
In geology, you learn that magma actually forms because of its water content (the term for this is flux melting) as far as water being wet, well thats another story...
They are pretty much the same thing. When its below the earth's surface, it is considered magma, but once it reaches the surface, it is then considered lava.
@@jakehildebrand1824 actually no because magma is just all the solid hot matter below the crust and lava is the liquid that comes out after the gasses and solids separated
@@Pihsrosnec actually exhaust is a byproduct; a different material entirely to the original compound. Being burnt would require the original material surrounded by the exhaust material. Fire is the raw heat (/electrons) that is (/are) emitted, and has not changed form, while still being surrounded by flammable exhaust, and the fuel source: therefor fire is burnt, as well as the fuel. By definition exhaust can be burnt, but isn't if it is still exhaust.
"did not spend my childhood watching Bill Nye and learning adjectives in Super Scribblenauts for some internet funnyman to say that water and lava are wet." Thank you for your service, you absolute trooper.
I would assume it can't be burnt because it's a chemical reaction. Fire isn't an actual substance, it's just the excess heat and energy coming off of the chemical reaction of burning an object.
@somadman false equivalency. Fire is not a substance, its a chemical reaction. Water, however, is an actual substance. It has mass. Plus, water always comes into contact with itself, so technically it IS wet. Plus, you wouldn't stick your hand in a water bucket if you don't like touching wet things. This debate was settled years ago, and the consensus still is that water is wet. Edit: Definition 1 of wet (adjective) means "covered or saturated with water or another liquid substance" which water is because its always saturated with itself. Definition 2 of wet means (noun) "liquid that makes something damp." Do I need to explain this one?
@somadman 1) yes you can, 2) Pluto aint a planet anymore, 3) for fucks sake my dude, generations other than 1 exist, 4) Glass meets NONE of the standards for being a liquid. Hell, there is even LIQUID GLASS. Glass is the result of a chemical reaction that occurs to sand when it gets superheated and cools. Note the COOLS part. It goes from solid (sand) to liquid (effectively magma) to amorphous solid (glass). Its a semi malleable solid. Edit: ALL SQUARES ARE RECTANGLES YOU DUMB FUCK. The SAYING is "all squares are rectangles, but not all rectangles are squares." A RECTANGLE is a 4 sided polygon with all interior angles at 90 degrees. Squares meet that criteria. Take a fucking geometry class, PLEASE.
@@arthurcosta1657 I say there's no dumb question. Asking about english, such as "is x wet?" or "are hotdogs sandwiches" is kind of pointless since english is kind of meaningless, its still important to precisely define stuff so that stuff can be described accurately
@@cate01a yes. whats important is that you understand the details beyond language. like the specifics of water, how it effects objects. the difference between water and lava. aside from that, it also gives you insight into the way we think, allows us to push our language to its limits, and gives us an interesting topic to occupy ourselves with.
I am still amazed and stupefied by Edgeworth's elegant, faultless logical response to Phoenix's proposition on the absence of water in lava when he calmly replied: "F**k you!"
oh my god what group chat did this happen in i need to see what kinda shit goes on there i love it make more videos about it or some sorta disc server please
"I did not spend my childhood watching Bill Nye and learning adjectives on Super Scribblenauts for some internet funnymen to say water and lava are wet" is possibly one the greatest retorts I have ever bore witness to.
what he meant was that lava cools down and hardens into rock, when water dries it evaporates into a gaseous state or gets absorbed into the surface it's on
The bit at the end with Larry just doing a thumbs up and saying: "this is what we call.......... getting owned" is just perfect. I'm gonna screen cap it
"consisting of, containing, covered with, or soaked with liquid (such as water)" -Merriam Webster anything consisting of liquid, or covered w/ it, is a liquid. Water is wet, Oobleck is wet, that goo in lava lamps is wet oil, and lava. are all wet.
@@bestaround3323 not quite, more on technically in the definition of a liquid state? You don't exactly drench or soak something in lava, it burns, and even if touched lightly, it's dry. Definitely a liquid state of molten rock, but in terms of a soaking liquid, it doesn't soak, it burns or melts through.
The answer is “yes,” “no,” and “kind of.” This my favorite kind of question to answer because simple answers are boring. First, let’s note the technical definition of the word “wet.” As an adjective, it means “covered or saturated with water or another liquid.” Being that lava, when liquid, is clearly a liquid, that makes it technically wet. The rocks over which it flows are technically wet with lava. So yes, technically lava is wet, even though we wouldn’t normally use the word “wet” in that way. However, our common usage of the word involves water (i.e. covered or saturated with water). The lava, itself (when liquid) is very much above the boiling point of water, so it is not wet with liquid water, so it’s a no in that sense. But here is where the “kind of” comes in. Lava does contain a lot of water, especially prior to eruption (when it’s called magma), but also as it flows across the ground. As mentioned, though, water boils off immediately at those temperatures so it’s not liquid or even vapor water within the lava. The water is actually dissolved and broken apart molecularly, into dissociated H+ and OH-… but in a sense, the lava is saturated with water, even though it’s not in a liquid or even, necessarily, a molecular state.
“covered or saturated with water or another liquid.” - lava being a liquid is irrelevant in the first argument since a thing cannot be saturated with itself. The definition of saturated is "holding as much water or moisture as can be absorbed; thoroughly soaked." A liquid cannot "hold moisture" since it is a liquid state itself that bestows moisture to other things. Also the "or ANOTHER liquid" part infers that the state of the water must also be liquid, eliminating the technicality in your third argument. Conclusion: lava isn't wet.
I'm pretty sure that at that temperature water containing complexes or basic groups can't hold water. Plus when water gets ionized it's not water anymore.
um, this is what Google told me If we're using it as an adjective (definition: covered or saturated with water or another liquid), then lava is a liquid state so it therefore it's wet. ... Lava does contain a lot of water, especially prior to eruption (when it's called magma), but also as it flows across the ground,' he explained.
Sam Garcia: So you’re saying the lava is wet and the surface of which it touches is wet also, or is lava just a liquid and the surface it touches is wet? (I personally think it’s the second option)
But that definition suggest the liquid isn't wet, but something covered or saturated with liquid is. So it's more like, if you pour lava on something and it absorbs it, the thing is wet from lava, not lava itself.
@@LookingForFrogs right but the fact that said liquid is capable of making something wet makes it wet itself It's like salt being salty on its own, and also making other foods salty when you put it on it
@@thefunnyguyfromtheburgerki3334 not according to definition you just gave. Its different with "salty" because salty doesn't mean "covered with salt", it means to have a specific taste, that salt has on its own. Water isnt soaked with water, so it doesn't fulfill the definition you quoted.
@@LookingForFrogs I didn't mean it as "covered with salt" it was merely an example of something that has a certain quality by itself retains that quality when combined with something else, and spreads that quality to the other thing it combined with.
You can’t saturate anything in lava, its so hot that it burns what it comes into contact with. Plus water itself isn’t wet, so not only can lava not make things wet, it’s not wet itself.
Well no lava "burn" some stuff the other like metal is "melt" if you can make a piece of iron on fire without using anything else and without melting it
@@reddytoplay9188 Perhaps you're right. While I think magma loses most of its trapped gases during eruption, I don't think it loses all of it. I'll Google it quickly to make sure. Edit: On the Wikipedia page of 'Volcanic Gases', it says that they are "... Dissolved, or disassociated gases in magma and *_lava_* ".
For anyone wondering... Lava isn't wet. Wetness is a propriety that not every fluid has... If you put water in a cup (if you look closely) you notice that the water is trying to climb the wall, if you pick a thinner cup or a tube this is even more accentuated... this fenomena is known as capillarity and is directly proportionate to the wetness of the fluid. If you take mercury, you can observe the opposite thing: the mercury will try to stay away from the walls of the cup. In general we can say that water is wet and mercury is not, even if is not totally correct, infact wetness is not a propriety of the fluid itself, but of the interaction between the fluid and the surface: for exemple on an hydrofhobic surface water can't be wet. Lava is more similar to mercury (basically molten metal) than water, so we can say that LAVA IS NOT WET.
You still sound stupid to google. All incognito does is stop the page from being recorded in your browser history. Google still logs the search, so Google knows! G̸̢̡͖̳̺̯̍́O̵̡̩͆̔͊̅́̈́̀̓̑̎̄Ō̶̩̝̪̦̻̼̺̱͗̐͆̾̎̾͜G̷̳̥͇̘̘̜̅́̿̀̈Ļ̴̩̟͎͚̗̰͉͈͙̭͕̅̾̈́̓̈E̴͚̘̘̐ ̶̛̯͖̘̤̀͐͗̍̈́͒͛͂̚A̵͖̯̟̪̩͒̔̐̾L̶̢͎͚̪͍͕͔͉͖̗̍͐͑͆́̓̃̆͒̾̂͌ͅẀ̷̮̬͚͗̐̋̊̎͋̾̇̓̂͝͝A̷̢͈̫̗̠̟̭̘͖͛̀͗̀́̈͛̕Ỵ̸̡̰̤̻̠͚̥̌͊̑͗̇̅̋̑́̓̏̚̕͝S̶̢̛̱͉͙̬͈̀̓̒̄̈̀̂̍͗ ̴̩͙̮̽̊͘Ǩ̸̪͚̘̻̝̮̻̣̯̫̖̙̺̖͎̋́̆̌̽̚N̶̛̛͍̗̘͙͉̟͍̠͓̻͎͙̬̔́̐͌̄̊̒Ờ̷̧̪̼͔̠̱͎̮͕̈̐̆͛͌͂̋͌̚̕͠ͅW̶̪͓̗̞̼̫̺̹͇̒͊̐S̸̢͕̹̟͔̳̩̓̓͋̄̋͜ͅ
What really got me was Butz's "fire isn't burnt though" Edit: people, seriously, stop telling me whether the comparison is correct or not, I've said neither and don't have a degree in material engineering and probably neither do you. Unless someone who studies that appears we will probably not know the correct answers among the millions of different ones in the internet. This isn't me giving my opinion, it's me saying "haha, joke funny" and I'm not going to argue about linguistics and material sciences, have a good day.
Burnt is implying a chemical reaction to change the substance, and fire is just really hot gas, so that is why fire isn't burnt. However, that cannot be carried over to the water argument because being wet isn't implying any kind of chemical reaction. That is the difference.
But that isn't true. For example, for something to be shaded it requires an absense of light. However in order for something to be wet it requires the presence of water. You see what I'm getting at? One is merely a state of something not being there (cold being the absence of heat and darkness being the absence of light), meanwhile the other is a state caused by something being there. You're basically saying moisture isn't real, which it is. Dryness however does apply, as dryness is caused by the absence of moisture. So does this mean dryness doesn't exist, as with cold and dark it's merely the absence of something?
Cold does exist- cold is the absence of heat, a form of energy. Shadows exist- shadows form in the absence of light. Both exist, but are simply the absence of something else. You could even interpret them as systems of measurement, if you wanted to.
As soon as I saw the title of this video I began crying and having war flashbacks to my 7th grade science classroom where people were nearly murdered during the “Is ice a rock?” debate where people nearly stabbed each others eyes out over whether humans were lava monsters or not.
@@thisisafalseaccount105 Ice: the solid form of water, produced by freezing; frozen water. Freeze: (of a liquid) be turned into ice or another solid as a result of extreme cold. Liquid: a substance that flows freely but is of constant volume, having a consistency like that of water or oil. I don't know what you're talking about, but I wasn't referring to ice anyway, do you really think there is ice inside of lava?
For those wondering, wet is method of defining the viscosity (sticky/gloopy nature) of liquids, such that something that is ‘wet’ has a low viscosity. Dependant on how you look at it, lava could be considered ‘wet’, though considerably less wet than water.
I'm supposed to write an English essay and I'm genuinely considering making this the topic. Edit: a little late but I got an A on the essay My stance was that lava IS wet. One of my arguments is that we call paint wet when it's drying. Since lava (much like paint) is a liquid substance that solidifies over time, it too fits within the definition of wet
"I did not spend my childhood watching bill nye and learning adjectives on super scribblenauts for some internet funneymen to say water and lava are wet" is probably one of the best things anyone has said ever
@@thethinker2372 glass would probably have been a better analogy as honey is kind of wet. But I would confidently say that glass isn't, even though it is a liquid. And as lava is a very high density liquid with no water in it at all, I would assume that it is also not wet.
2:31 "did not spend my childhood watching *bill nye* and learning adjectives on *super scribblenauts* for some funnymen to say water and lava are wet" best line in this video, hands down
"wet" actually has a scientific definition. It has to do with the curve of the surface around an object. If it tries to climb the object, it's considered wet
@@ArynBendah No, Mobius is talking about the difference in strength between the cohesive (sticks to itself) and adhesive (sticks to other surfaces) forces. Water is more adhesive than cohesive, so if you put it in a narrow glass it tries to climb the walls of the glass (but doesn't get very far because gravity) and curves down in the middle. Mercury is more cohesive than adhesive, so it instead curves up in the middle (tries to make a ball, but doesn't get very far because gravity). Also, his definition is BS. If a liquid has an adhesive force at all, it can wet solids - The comparative strength between the forces just determines how wet the solid gets.
This shows how smart Phoenix Wright really is. I mean, whenever I argue this with my family, friends, therapist, suicide hotline caller, and my house’s ghosts, we get to arguing over plasma, and Phoenix finished the argument without even getting to gasses!
"I should look this up but I don't want to sound stupid to google."
Same.
Its wet
Thank me later
Google already knows a lot about us that that doesn't even matter anymore
I remember my geology lessons from high school (it was only a few years ago), basically magma is what it's called when it's underground, lava is what it's called when it's at the surface and lava is just molten rock while magma contains some other things like dissolved gas that go away when it reaches the surface
@[GD] Stix you were right
@@randomguyonyoutube6183 Oh my god, we did the same thing.
for some reason, classy and formal characters talking like two internet trolls is the peak of humor for me
Agreed.
The typos make it so much better
"Classy and formal"
??????
@@SmashSSL well, relatively classy and formal compared to speaking caveman.
@@SmashSSL idk man i dont really wear a suit and tie everywhere I go do you?
Edit: or a neckerchief
"wild"
So much and so little is conveyed there.
Lol
100th like. Wild
similar to “mood”
Edgeworth: "IS THAT ALL I AM? A FUNNYMAN?"
No, Edgeworth, you are the entire circus.
hes the entire circus industry
Being a circus is not that bad. Everyone is laughing inside you.
He doesn’t say it
Trilo: Hey Ben, can you believe that this comment section thinks this uptight excuse for a prosecutor is on par with anybody at our circus?! Clearly he needs a demonstration of a true performance!(Proceeds to sing Row Row Row Your Boat.)
Ben: umm...h-hey trilo..I don't t-think it works like that..
@@unpen4548 no I am
"youre so mean to me"
Ah yes, the famous Edgeworth defense.
Sounds like a chess move
Phoenix reply is the best I love it
1.3k likes, 2 replies
@@Sh0ckV Whoa holy crap, that's a lot of likes O:
"You're so mean to me"
7 page muda time????
"but i dont wanna sound stupid to google"
Hits right home
The best thing is not that it hits right into home, is that he was the first one to google sonething.
PS: and don't feel bad, googling sonething is better when you don't know something or aren't fully sure. As long as you check where you get the info, it's a smart thing to corroborate. Feel good we have technology.
Just use incognito mode, I use it often for stupid questions xD
@@ahmadaldulaie7604 ok, now I actually feel called out.
@@ahmadaldulaie7604 bro this is me LMAO
OBJECTION!
"I did not spend my childhood watching bill nye and learning adjectives in super scribblenauts for some internet funnyman to say that water and lava are wet."
"THAT'S ALL I AM NOW? A *FUNNYMAN?"*
“I meant the op but yeah now its u.”
Lava is at is stupid, but water really is wet, water molecules have water molecules on them
@free wifi well if its one molecule then its not wet, but chances are, theres gonna be more than one molecule...so water is wet.
Ness
The thought of Edgeworth googling something while in the courtroom makes me laugh
I think I've lost 10 brain cells just by looking at the argument.
Considering we have 100 billion, I'd say that's not bad at all
Honestly I get where you’re coming from, both sides are kinda stupid as neither of them bring anything up that makes sense. That said I myself side with the fact that lava is wet, ‘cause it is by definition wet.
i think i gained braincells instead
Just wait until you see the odds and evens disscussion from tumblr...
Same here
I just realized that this was an actual conversation between real people and not a script written for a funny video
thats why i joinder their discord
Reddit? This feels like a reddit moment with the stupid “i love you bro” and the “i was talking about the OP”
@@srgzachattack1594 nah dude they said it in the description
*CORRECT*
Wait really omg if that’s true then omg are people really that stupid?
One guy: is lava wet?
Everyone in the room: *HAS A MENTAL BREAKDOWN*
BREAKDOWN BREAKDOWN
@Low xang yen Misaki kara shiokaze
Tonneru nuke tettō e
Hikareai komichi ni mayoikomu
@@Ekis_bokis_siris_ekis koko roni
is *inset random liquid here* wet?
@@wig6534 sadly I cannot say it is
My answer: It's worth noting that it is possible for a liquid to be dry. In fact, you can make liquid water dry by mixing it with silica powder, resulting in water that can't make anything wet. Water is wet due to multi-molecular hydrogen bonds. Water sticks to things due to its semi-magnetic properties.
As such, I'm unsure if lava is wet, I don't think it has the same chemical properties.
@nameless one he literally never said anything about viscosity lmao what are you trying to contradict
By semimagnetic you mean adhesion and cohesion?
Depends if wet implies a liquid or substance or just water on a surface.
Also, water cannot become wet because it is a liquid, and wet state applies to solid states which has some kind of absorbance
Is the silica powder wet after mixing with water? I'd say yes
I’d go by technically definition with wet meaning “something that has a liquid applied”. That’s why I argue that water isn’t wet because of cohesion and adhesion and the chemicals bonds you’re talking about. You put water in a table, the table is wet and forms adhesion. You put water on water and you just get water because of cohesion. It’s molecularly different. That’s why I’d argue lava isn’t wet either. Lava on lava makes more lava, lava on a table is just lava on a table.
You know,
"If someone is hotter than you"
It simply means..
"Your cooler than him"
Epic
you're*
@@alyssabungque7110 ye
th-cam.com/video/fS9OoVPl7fY/w-d-xo.html
NOICE
"Fire isn't burnt"
"Wait hes right"
"Whos right?"
Actually fire is burnt. It's literally everything that is burnt, fire... or rapid generation of plasma due to oxygenization of elements under high temperature circumstances is literally the formation of oxides due to combustion and as such the gas and plasma mixture is actually what is burnt.
@@livedandletdie dang
@@spidroxide5479 .............dude.
I mean, I may be thinking about this wrong, but if fire could burn it would be an endless selfsustaining force(as long as there is oxygen) that never loses energy and expands untill there is no oxygen left in the world. Which, since it hasn't happened yet, I would assume that fire can not burn.
“ *Pheonix Wright* ”
Edgeworth: "I googled it"
Also Edgeworth, secs later: "I should look this up but I don't wanna sound stupid to google"
Even he has a bottom line in his stupid he is not willing to lower himself to
Плагиат
“Secs” he he he
That's because this is a real conversation, that actually happened.
Mood
I love how quickly the argument devolved into swearing at each other
Edgeworth's facial expressions get me everytime
Neat
His face expressions when he's suffering and cornered puts a smile in my face, because I don't have to load my last save (・∀・)
YOU? IN THIS PART OF TH-cam?
Didn't know you were a fellow ace attorney fan
You're even more cultured then I thought
Favorite quote:
"Did not spend my childhood watching Bill Nye and learning adjectives on Super Scribblenauts for some internet funnymen to say water and lava are wet"
This made the video right here
You know, the ammout of effort on this retort wouldn't make me mas for being roasted by It
"LAVA IS DISEASED!! Rotten too the Core! There's no Saving it!"~Armstrong
@George Khoory please tell me you're trolling
@George Khoory 1) you aren't much younger than me, it really just depends on how fun your teachers are
2) Bill Nye the Science Guy is probably the reason I love science so much. He had a TV show until 1998 about really wacky science facts, experiments, and other sciencey things with a little bit of visual and audio humor thrown in. If you like chemistry, or science in general, I _highly_ suggest you look him up
Jesus how have a never heard someone use the "fire isnt burnt" argument for water being wet, thats genius
But that’s because fire isn’t burnt. Fire is hot. Things that lack moisture and contain carbon get burnt, such as dry twigs, leaves, bread, bodies, paper, etc. On the other hand, things that do not contain carbon like glass, water, and rocks do not get burned, they evaporate or melt. Fire is hot, and water is wet.
Burnt is the aftermath, fire is currently burning. Water is wet, literally ONLY liquids that contain water can be wet! Your skin, absorbing the water IS WHAT WET SENSATION IS
@@lovingkokichi4159 but wet is not a temperature
@@Lantern_Light Hold on. How do you determine if a liquid "contains" water? Does gasoline contain water? Does chloroform? If you store pure alcohol in an air tight bottle, is the inside of the bottle not wet?
Fire’s not burnt, but as lava is molten rock, technically lava is burnt.
In geology, you learn that magma actually forms because of its water content (the term for this is flux melting) as far as water being wet, well thats another story...
I won't be able to sleep thinking about this now
Wtf this is an innapropriate comment, i edited it
Ok
I'm too
@@raiseddd now i won't be able to sleep not knowing how to feel about this
God bless you
“so the diff is just where it is”
“yeah p much”
“wild”
i’m pissing myself, funny man
what happened to the comments
“are magma and lava even different thisng or is that the same hting I like I don’t even know that much”
_~Miles Edgeworth_
Meanwhile, Masahiro Sakurai:
MAGUMA
LAVA
MAGUMA
LAVA
MAGUMA
LAVA
@឵឵឵឵҈ I expected it therefore it’s not a rick roll
They are pretty much the same thing.
When its below the earth's surface, it is considered magma, but once it reaches the surface, it is then considered lava.
@@jakehildebrand1824 actually no because magma is just all the solid hot matter below the crust and lava is the liquid that comes out after the gasses and solids separated
the typos really make this
The whole discussion is gold and the format is perfect but 2:01 is just great. Up in my reaction imagine folder it goes
"THATS ALL I AM NOW? A FUNNYMAN?"
For some reason this line gets me.
*sad violin plays*
Forget about water, or lava. This dude made a good point. Think about it... "Fire isn't burnt"
Fire is burnt, it's residual heat; exhaust isn't.
@@bahamutzero4903 exhaust is burnt, fire isn't
@@Pihsrosnec actually exhaust is a byproduct; a different material entirely to the original compound. Being burnt would require the original material surrounded by the exhaust material.
Fire is the raw heat (/electrons) that is (/are) emitted, and has not changed form, while still being surrounded by flammable exhaust, and the fuel source: therefor fire is burnt, as well as the fuel. By definition exhaust can be burnt, but isn't if it is still exhaust.
@@bahamutzero4903 this is why I got a d in chemistry
@@Pihsrosnec You got the D in chemistry?
"LAVA IS LIQUID I GOOGLED IT"
**holds a piece of paper**
He printed the result page so he could use it as evidence
@@jpase nah his computer is disguised as a piece of paper
@@bobswag82 nah the piece of paper is the new design for a computer
@@had0j ohhhhh right I forgot they announced paper 15
@@bobswag82 yeah
This is similar to "is soup a drink?" Theory
I hope this age well
"LIKING CHARACTERS NAMED AFTER ROCKS DOES NOT MEAN I KNOW ABOUT ROCKS"
*steven universe fans have risen
You called?
accurate
You mean lesbian rock show?
Who summoned me
@@embermagician nobody.
Guess you could call this a..... HOT take? Lol
you better start sleeping with one eye open
Get out. Now.
Why
H
Wow you sure did boil their temper
I think I Iearned more about lava in a single TH-cam video, than I did in geology class.
I was 1st to Mustache’s comment. I hate when people do that but I must do it.
GEOLOGY CLASS
Lol
Is nice to see you here
Oh hey, you are more a man of culture than I thought you were. Sorry for underestimating lol
as long as there's multiple molecules, water is wet.
You are the only person I've ever seen who agrees with me
"there is no water in lava"
me a geologist: OBJECTION!
Well Vulcano, i s l a v a w e t?
I s a i r d r y?
A m I r e a l?
@@ellusiv5121 it depends, it depends a lot but usually not, at least not 100%, and no, respectively.
lol I was just gonna say
@@ellusiv5121
Does it have water in it?
Does it not have water in it?
-Do you have water in you?-
Do you think?
Ah yes.
Volatiles
Bro, there’s no water in lava.
Not liquid water, but it often has water vapor according to scientists
Take that!!!
Phoenix, this is why aliens won't visit us.
It has H²O the vapour kind.
A LIQUID DOESN'T NEED WATER TO BE A LIQUID TF
"Think about it, fire isn't burnt"
"he's right tho"
"Who's right"
Oh my god I'm scrEAMING
Wrong tense. It’s burning. Present tense. That’s how English works my dudes
@@russiancheems2275 he’s quoting the video lmao
@@sandycole2347 ye ik still
*disappointed stare* "id assume you" I CANT LMFALBDKSJ
@@russiancheems2275 it's correct tense in the context that fire makes you burnt but it itself isn't burnt, it's burning.
2:41 Wow. Broke the fourth wall and roasted a character in one sentence. Impressive.
"did not spend my childhood watching Bill Nye and learning adjectives in Super Scribblenauts for some internet funnyman to say that water and lava are wet."
Thank you for your service, you absolute trooper.
ikr lad
except water is wet
STOP FOLLOWING ME
@@pedro-km7oe so are the atoms wet?
@@Cozmikazi no but as long as there are two water molecules together, than one is making the other wet
Butz: Fire isn't burnt
Phoenix: *No no, he's got a point*
Who's got the point tho
@@gmalamat1393 You
I would assume it can't be burnt because it's a chemical reaction. Fire isn't an actual substance, it's just the excess heat and energy coming off of the chemical reaction of burning an object.
@somadman false equivalency. Fire is not a substance, its a chemical reaction. Water, however, is an actual substance. It has mass. Plus, water always comes into contact with itself, so technically it IS wet. Plus, you wouldn't stick your hand in a water bucket if you don't like touching wet things. This debate was settled years ago, and the consensus still is that water is wet.
Edit: Definition 1 of wet (adjective) means "covered or saturated with water or another liquid substance" which water is because its always saturated with itself.
Definition 2 of wet means (noun) "liquid that makes something damp." Do I need to explain this one?
@somadman 1) yes you can,
2) Pluto aint a planet anymore,
3) for fucks sake my dude, generations other than 1 exist,
4) Glass meets NONE of the standards for being a liquid. Hell, there is even LIQUID GLASS. Glass is the result of a chemical reaction that occurs to sand when it gets superheated and cools. Note the COOLS part. It goes from solid (sand) to liquid (effectively magma) to amorphous solid (glass). Its a semi malleable solid.
Edit: ALL SQUARES ARE RECTANGLES YOU DUMB FUCK. The SAYING is "all squares are rectangles, but not all rectangles are squares." A RECTANGLE is a 4 sided polygon with all interior angles at 90 degrees. Squares meet that criteria. Take a fucking geometry class, PLEASE.
“Alexa, is lava wet?”
*“Yes, lava is wet.”*
I rest my case.
Just tested it. Confirmed.
Alexa is being ironic to such a dumb question
No it isn't
@@arthurcosta1657 I say there's no dumb question.
Asking about english, such as "is x wet?" or "are hotdogs sandwiches" is kind of pointless since english is kind of meaningless, its still important to precisely define stuff so that stuff can be described accurately
@@cate01a yes. whats important is that you understand the details beyond language. like the specifics of water, how it effects objects. the difference between water and lava. aside from that, it also gives you insight into the way we think, allows us to push our language to its limits, and gives us an interesting topic to occupy ourselves with.
Phoenix: Objection! Lavabending is a subtype of earthbending, not waterbending.
Edgeworth: What?
GF: Hes probably thinking about other girls
My last few functioning brain cells:
XDDDD
Functioning you said?
@@insulam821 man I wish I had functioning brain cells...
@@w花b you good mate
Omg
"Lava is not wet there's no water in lava"
Scientists: *_Well yes but actually no_*
The answer to most questions is normally somewhere between yes and no.
Perhaps
284 likes
nice
@@ballinbinandastick2708 Maybe.
Possibly
This looks like something that went on discord lmao.
Its an actual discord argument
PiPSOWYT Really? I see that there's men of culture in discord as well.
@Vegan Milk Literally everyone uses discord, not really that cultured.
cuz it did phoenix
@@elfelon9465 oh really? Thanks
I am still amazed and stupefied by Edgeworth's elegant, faultless logical response to Phoenix's proposition on the absence of water in lava when he calmly replied:
"F**k you!"
My brain imploded when the words "Fire isn't burnt" were uttered
Fire also isn't matter, it's energy.
@@wta1518 but the energy matters in our lives so fire is matter
@@smallvillager8807 Oh yeah this is big brain time
@@dready529 xd
@@wta1518 fire isnt anything, its a process
"I should look this up but I don't want to sound stupid to google."
the targeted ads: elementary school tutors in your area
You always have incognito mode
@@cly7894 incognito mode can't hide you from Google
Dude, I misspelled so much stuff while typing into that stupid query-field that Google must think I'm borderline retarded.
"You are not the clown, you are the entire circus"
"You are not the clown, nor the entire circus. You are the whole carnival."
@@Obnoxious-tu6gh you are not the clown, or the circus, nor the carnival. You are the whole franchise
"You are not the clown, nor the circus, nor the carnival, nor the franchise. You are the whole entertaining industry"
@@speedwagon_69 i like this one lol
@@speedwagon_69 yo I like dat one
The argument always just randomly goes back to a normal conversation instantly
"I should look this up, but I don't wanna sound stupid to google."
Oh my god why is this me.
That's why you Google stupid questions in incognito mode.
@@Khaim.m heh, yeah.
Wait maybe that's the purpose of incognito mode? (Joke)
@Frank 001 I more meant what the people who created it made it for but yeah, _definitely_ no one uses it for that.
@@thepan4ever I actually think I use incognito mode more for that shit than for porn lmao
@@JadeJuno same lmao
"That's all I am now?? A FUNNYMAN??!" The Edgeworth face is perfect for this
Yes you are Edgeworth, yes you are my memelord
oh my god what group chat did this happen in i need to see what kinda shit goes on there i love it make more videos about it or some sorta disc server please
check the pinned comment for the discord server
@@MaxSketchalot pogge r
wow that's a lot of likes
wtf
"water is wet because it definitely isn't dry."
"I did not spend my childhood watching Bill Nye and learning adjectives on Super Scribblenauts for some internet funnymen to say water and lava are wet" is possibly one the greatest retorts I have ever bore witness to.
0:57
He states that lava "dries," therefore implying that it must be wet in order to become dry. Case closed.
What are raisins?
Dried grape.
But. They dont have to be wet, if we dont count the juice inside, your argument is futile.
Don't ever read that aggressively
what he meant was that lava cools down and hardens into rock, when water dries it evaporates into a gaseous state or gets absorbed into the surface it's on
Water can cool and become solid too though. The two just have two different freezing temperatures.
Worse part is that i can totally imagine this chat on a discord server
Its an actual conversation too, it says so in the description
@@weirdshit211 Funny as hell though
The fact that this was a conversation real people had and argued about makes this even more comedic 😂
I feel like this is what Phoenix and Edgeworth do in their free time, just dicuss random stupid things to not get bored.
Imagine having them as roommates, the meal would never get boring
The bit at the end with Larry just doing a thumbs up and saying: "this is what we call.......... getting owned" is just perfect. I'm gonna screen cap it
@couch_ potato
Screenshot?
@couch_ potato
Eeee I just think they meant that tho, not 100% sure
The problem is that no definition for "Wet" is provided.
"consisting of, containing, covered with, or soaked with liquid (such as water)"
-Merriam Webster
anything consisting of liquid, or covered w/ it, is a liquid. Water is wet, Oobleck is wet, that goo in lava lamps is wet oil, and lava. are all wet.
@@bobzillathebabykicker2981 but Lava is molten rock?
@@PhAnToMkIsS2008 But still a liquid. By the definition it is wet.
@@bestaround3323 not quite, more on technically in the definition of a liquid state? You don't exactly drench or soak something in lava, it burns, and even if touched lightly, it's dry. Definitely a liquid state of molten rock, but in terms of a soaking liquid, it doesn't soak, it burns or melts through.
@@PhAnToMkIsS2008 Lava is around 2100 Farenheit, Iron melts at 2,800 Farenheit. Therefore you could easily soak iron in lava getting it wet.
"Fire isn't burnt" yeah that's because fire is molecules in the process of breaking down it's not a physical thing.
"water isnt wet tho"
It was here that I absolutely lost my shit.
Its not wet
@@collonjameson7684 Water sticks to itself by cohesion. If anything else has water sticking to it, we call it wet... why is water the exception?
@@collonjameson7684 Are you telling me water is dry?
@@collonjameson7684 when something touches water it gets wet, and H2O molecules are stacked one on another so therefore water is wet. google it
isarafa 28 fucking yes, i was going insane
The answer is “yes,” “no,” and “kind of.” This my favorite kind of question to answer because simple answers are boring.
First, let’s note the technical definition of the word “wet.” As an adjective, it means “covered or saturated with water or another liquid.” Being that lava, when liquid, is clearly a liquid, that makes it technically wet. The rocks over which it flows are technically wet with lava. So yes, technically lava is wet, even though we wouldn’t normally use the word “wet” in that way.
However, our common usage of the word involves water (i.e. covered or saturated with water). The lava, itself (when liquid) is very much above the boiling point of water, so it is not wet with liquid water, so it’s a no in that sense.
But here is where the “kind of” comes in. Lava does contain a lot of water, especially prior to eruption (when it’s called magma), but also as it flows across the ground. As mentioned, though, water boils off immediately at those temperatures so it’s not liquid or even vapor water within the lava. The water is actually dissolved and broken apart molecularly, into dissociated H+ and OH-… but in a sense, the lava is saturated with water, even though it’s not in a liquid or even, necessarily, a molecular state.
DeltaTurtle420 This comment deserves more upvotes.
I learned something new by reading it
@@LeeHatake93 likes* this ain't reddit lol
“covered or saturated with water or another liquid.” - lava being a liquid is irrelevant in the first argument since a thing cannot be saturated with itself. The definition of saturated is "holding as much water or moisture as can be absorbed; thoroughly soaked." A liquid cannot "hold moisture" since it is a liquid state itself that bestows moisture to other things.
Also the "or ANOTHER liquid" part infers that the state of the water must also be liquid, eliminating the technicality in your third argument. Conclusion: lava isn't wet.
I'm pretty sure that at that temperature water containing complexes or basic groups can't hold water. Plus when water gets ionized it's not water anymore.
@@FlashStatic if it's a biphasic system then yes, liquids can be wet with water. Ever tried doing liquid-liquid extractions?
despite having never once played an ace attorney game I am gradually becoming familiar with the cast against my will
blacker than a moonless night
It's the perfect setup to make dialogue dramatic. All the slap on table and interjecting.
Anyone: *makes a good argument *
Everyone in Twitter: "youre so mean to me" 1:12
i searched on google "is lava wet?"
and guess what?
pheonix was wright
um, this is what Google told me
If we're using it as an adjective (definition: covered or saturated with water or another liquid), then lava is a liquid state so it therefore it's wet. ... Lava does contain a lot of water, especially prior to eruption (when it's called magma), but also as it flows across the ground,' he explained.
Criticism-Chan, “Pheonix was *wright*”. I see what u did there.
But..he....no?
Sam Garcia: So you’re saying the lava is wet and the surface of which it touches is wet also, or is lava just a liquid and the surface it touches is wet? (I personally think it’s the second option)
NO NO NO NOT PUNS
HOT TAKE: LAVA IS A SAUCE
But that definition suggest the liquid isn't wet, but something covered or saturated with liquid is. So it's more like, if you pour lava on something and it absorbs it, the thing is wet from lava, not lava itself.
@@LookingForFrogs right but the fact that said liquid is capable of making something wet makes it wet itself
It's like salt being salty on its own, and also making other foods salty when you put it on it
@@thefunnyguyfromtheburgerki3334 not according to definition you just gave. Its different with "salty" because salty doesn't mean "covered with salt", it means to have a specific taste, that salt has on its own. Water isnt soaked with water, so it doesn't fulfill the definition you quoted.
@@LookingForFrogs I didn't mean it as "covered with salt" it was merely an example of something that has a certain quality by itself retains that quality when combined with something else, and spreads that quality to the other thing it combined with.
You can’t saturate anything in lava, its so hot that it burns what it comes into contact with.
Plus water itself isn’t wet, so not only can lava not make things wet, it’s not wet itself.
Magma is any form of melted rock. Water in it’s solid state, Ice, is considered a rock. So thus, water is a type of magma.
Depends on where it's found.
If it's on the surface, then water's actually lava
"Lava burns anything it touches"
Tungsten: I don't have such weaknesses
But it is still gonna burn anyway but it won't cause any damage to it.
Well no lava "burn" some stuff the other like metal is "melt" if you can make a piece of iron on fire without using anything else and without melting it
@@ut2819 I was quoting the video, and the joke is that lava isn't hot enough to melt tungsten, but ok.
@@mldavid4056 I'm talking about @Bill Kalvon
@@ut2819 Oh my bad
1:28 I've never seen Edgeworth so blank looking, he's so expressive but here he just looks defeated
Honestly that blank expression and the typos just makes me lose it at the part
@@aaandag9688 same
@@malucart that would be nice, but I can't afford games so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
@@noellerutledge8789 we are the pirates. (pirate it?
@@bait5257 I don't pirate
"There is literally no water in lava."
Except there is.
@Sthaman Sinha It's not liquid, but there is water vapour.
That is magma not lava...
@@reddytoplay9188 Perhaps you're right. While I think magma loses most of its trapped gases during eruption, I don't think it loses all of it.
I'll Google it quickly to make sure.
Edit: On the Wikipedia page of 'Volcanic Gases', it says that they are "... Dissolved, or disassociated gases in magma and *_lava_* ".
@@khamelionnelson4506 But, no one said lava wasn't liquid...
I love reading these replies you have the two smart kids who got different answers
For anyone wondering...
Lava isn't wet. Wetness is a propriety that not every fluid has...
If you put water in a cup (if you look closely) you notice that the water is trying to climb the wall, if you pick a thinner cup or a tube this is even more accentuated... this fenomena is known as capillarity and is directly proportionate to the wetness of the fluid.
If you take mercury, you can observe the opposite thing: the mercury will try to stay away from the walls of the cup.
In general we can say that water is wet and mercury is not, even if is not totally correct, infact wetness is not a propriety of the fluid itself, but of the interaction between the fluid and the surface: for exemple on an hydrofhobic surface water can't be wet.
Lava is more similar to mercury (basically molten metal) than water, so we can say that LAVA IS NOT WET.
I just screen shot Edgeworth saying "You're so mean to me" & sent it to my friend. She's never been happier. It's her new wall paper.
Time?
@@british_guy862 01:31 am GST South America
@@RandomThings12 thanks
@@british_guy862 1:12
@@british_guy862 1:46 am WIB
"is lava wet?"
Everyone: *EMERGENCY MEETING*
I don't know is oil wet
"lava was not wet"
HEY GUYS THIS GUY IS SUSSY!!!!!! FUNNY AMOGUS!!!!! RED ALWAYS SUS GUYS!!!!!!!! HEY GUYS RED VENT!!!!!!!!!
@@Zyrikun edgeworth was not an imposter
@@somedudewhospamsballoons2707 seemed like that to me with his sussy face
"I should look this up, but I don't want to sound stupid to Google."
Incognito Mode: **slowly looks up and smiles, with a gleam in its eye**
The true use for incognito mode
You still sound stupid to google. All incognito does is stop the page from being recorded in your browser history. Google still logs the search, so Google knows!
G̸̢̡͖̳̺̯̍́O̵̡̩͆̔͊̅́̈́̀̓̑̎̄Ō̶̩̝̪̦̻̼̺̱͗̐͆̾̎̾͜G̷̳̥͇̘̘̜̅́̿̀̈Ļ̴̩̟͎͚̗̰͉͈͙̭͕̅̾̈́̓̈E̴͚̘̘̐ ̶̛̯͖̘̤̀͐͗̍̈́͒͛͂̚A̵͖̯̟̪̩͒̔̐̾L̶̢͎͚̪͍͕͔͉͖̗̍͐͑͆́̓̃̆͒̾̂͌ͅẀ̷̮̬͚͗̐̋̊̎͋̾̇̓̂͝͝A̷̢͈̫̗̠̟̭̘͖͛̀͗̀́̈͛̕Ỵ̸̡̰̤̻̠͚̥̌͊̑͗̇̅̋̑́̓̏̚̕͝S̶̢̛̱͉͙̬͈̀̓̒̄̈̀̂̍͗ ̴̩͙̮̽̊͘Ǩ̸̪͚̘̻̝̮̻̣̯̫̖̙̺̖͎̋́̆̌̽̚N̶̛̛͍̗̘͙͉̟͍̠͓̻͎͙̬̔́̐͌̄̊̒Ờ̷̧̪̼͔̠̱͎̮͕̈̐̆͛͌͂̋͌̚̕͠ͅW̶̪͓̗̞̼̫̺̹͇̒͊̐S̸̢͕̹̟͔̳̩̓̓͋̄̋͜ͅ
Yeah, that's what DuckDuckGo is for.
These videos gave me high blood pressure
What really got me was Butz's "fire isn't burnt though"
Edit: people, seriously, stop telling me whether the comparison is correct or not, I've said neither and don't have a degree in material engineering and probably neither do you. Unless someone who studies that appears we will probably not know the correct answers among the millions of different ones in the internet.
This isn't me giving my opinion, it's me saying "haha, joke funny" and I'm not going to argue about linguistics and material sciences, have a good day.
Burnt is implying a chemical reaction to change the substance, and fire is just really hot gas, so that is why fire isn't burnt. However, that cannot be carried over to the water argument because being wet isn't implying any kind of chemical reaction. That is the difference.
@@ultimateking2238 ok? I just found the argument funny, not correct.
@@ashamansedai I know, I was more just venting, sorry
@@ultimateking2238 oh ok
@@ultimateking2238 dont be sorry. you are smart. you taught me something today. thank you.
I correct myself:
Wet does not exist. It is an adjective for how it feels, but in reality it does not exist. Just like cold or shadow.
But that isn't true. For example, for something to be shaded it requires an absense of light. However in order for something to be wet it requires the presence of water. You see what I'm getting at?
One is merely a state of something not being there (cold being the absence of heat and darkness being the absence of light), meanwhile the other is a state caused by something being there. You're basically saying moisture isn't real, which it is. Dryness however does apply, as dryness is caused by the absence of moisture.
So does this mean dryness doesn't exist, as with cold and dark it's merely the absence of something?
Cold does exist- cold is the absence of heat, a form of energy.
Shadows exist- shadows form in the absence of light.
Both exist, but are simply the absence of something else. You could even interpret them as systems of measurement, if you wanted to.
I removed 69 likes
@@opjball8273 How could we be so foolish?
Well yes, But actually no.
“THATS ALL I AM NOW? A FUNNYMAN?”
My man asking the real questions
As soon as I saw the title of this video I began crying and having war flashbacks to my 7th grade science classroom where people were nearly murdered during the “Is ice a rock?” debate where people nearly stabbed each others eyes out over whether humans were lava monsters or not.
HELP?
"youre so mean to me"
"HOLD IT!"
phoenix making That Face while saying "I'm not getting involved in this" is such a phoenix wright thing to do
th-cam.com/video/klGi_WZ17U0/w-d-xo.html ..
"Rock doesn't get you wet"
Well neither does really cold ice.
ice is just rock water
@@tornadomash00 Rock is actually silica; ice is just a solid.
@@bahamutzero4903 water that is rock
@@tornadomash00 You're water that is rock
@@bahamutzero4903 you not sense
"I should look this up but I don't wanna sound stupid to Google"
I feel your pain, Edgeworth.
”Lava is liquid I googled it" xD
“I don’t want to sound stupid to google”
NOT ALWAYS
Sometimes its a Rock.
@dimitry lefterov but then it wouldnt be lava anymore
@@the711devin4 just search up the definition of wet.
The irony of this is that there actually is water in lava
no there isn't though, or you're joking and I'm about to get wooshed
The water in lava is not in a liquid state though, so it doesn't really matter. Lava is much too hot for that.
@@jd1800 Ice is a liquid state, just a frozen one.
@@thisisafalseaccount105
Ice: the solid form of water, produced by freezing; frozen water.
Freeze: (of a liquid) be turned into ice or another solid as a result of extreme cold.
Liquid: a substance that flows freely but is of constant volume, having a consistency like that of water or oil.
I don't know what you're talking about, but I wasn't referring to ice anyway, do you really think there is ice inside of lava?
@@jd1800 but how does that mean it’s not frozen liquid? And I just wanted to bring ice up.
For those wondering, wet is method of defining the viscosity (sticky/gloopy nature) of liquids, such that something that is ‘wet’ has a low viscosity. Dependant on how you look at it, lava could be considered ‘wet’, though considerably less wet than water.
Here is the correct answer
Ah! Thank you, that actually sounds reasonable!
I imagine a huge rock golem coming out of a lava shower...him being "wet" with lava would be the same as you being wet with water.
No no and no
Igneous? Magma? … Spider Riders? 👀
good catch 👀
@@MaxSketchalot yesss!!!😊🕷
I'm supposed to write an English essay and I'm genuinely considering making this the topic.
Edit: a little late but I got an A on the essay
My stance was that lava IS wet. One of my arguments is that we call paint wet when it's drying. Since lava (much like paint) is a liquid substance that solidifies over time, it too fits within the definition of wet
So how was the essay?
Yeah what happened?
@@ElusiveMoth5 I got an A on it, actually. Which in my country is the highest grade you can get
@@pastaman64 nicee
@@pastaman64 can you post the essay
2:01 out of context is a great reaction image
"Wild."
- Edgeworth said calmly
"I did not spend my childhood watching bill nye and learning adjectives on super scribblenauts for some internet funneymen to say water and lava are wet" is probably one of the best things anyone has said ever
The "Whose right??" after making a good point from Butz is the most Larry Butz thing to ever exist
He’s got a point
yes
yes
yes
yes
Yes
"Just because its liquid,doesnt mean its wet."
_The More You Know_
@@thethinker2372 but honey is wet tho?
@@thethinker2372 honey is wet
honey is wet though.
@@thethinker2372 glass would probably have been a better analogy as honey is kind of wet. But I would confidently say that glass isn't, even though it is a liquid. And as lava is a very high density liquid with no water in it at all, I would assume that it is also not wet.
"So the difference is where it is?"
"Yeah it changes p much"
"W I L D"
2:31 "did not spend my childhood watching *bill nye* and learning adjectives on *super scribblenauts* for some funnymen to say water and lava are wet"
best line in this video, hands down
I can see why people would like this game.
"wet" actually has a scientific definition. It has to do with the curve of the surface around an object. If it tries to climb the object, it's considered wet
Does that mean when I climb a mountain, I make the mountain wet?
@@ArynBendah depends on how attractive the mountain thinks you are.
@@ArynBendah No, Mobius is talking about the difference in strength between the cohesive (sticks to itself) and adhesive (sticks to other surfaces) forces. Water is more adhesive than cohesive, so if you put it in a narrow glass it tries to climb the walls of the glass (but doesn't get very far because gravity) and curves down in the middle. Mercury is more cohesive than adhesive, so it instead curves up in the middle (tries to make a ball, but doesn't get very far because gravity).
Also, his definition is BS. If a liquid has an adhesive force at all, it can wet solids - The comparative strength between the forces just determines how wet the solid gets.
@@angolin9352 yes I realize this. I was making what is called a "joke" based on wordplay.
I've read so many comments with the word wet that it doesn't feel like a word anymor3
This shows how smart Phoenix Wright really is. I mean, whenever I argue this with my family, friends, therapist, suicide hotline caller, and my house’s ghosts, we get to arguing over plasma, and Phoenix finished the argument without even getting to gasses!
Sir, this is a denny's
I love how the grammatical errors make it seem like two blokes arguing on discord