Is the water in our bodies actual H2O? Would it be possible to

>>7856032
Yes.

>>7856032
Sure, hotbox a human and collect the water through condensation.

spice must flow

>>7856056
>>7856038
/vg/ told me that was wrong.

>>7856060
Well they're definitely wrong. A person perspires a lot of water, you're doing it right now. If you put a person in an oven, water from your body evaporates, find a way to collect the water vapor, using some kind of condenser, you can collect the water from a person's body, leaving a dry crispy left overs.

>>7856060
Link to thread? I want to see how retarded they are.

Also keep in mind that a lot of the water will me mixed with other crap so it will require some serious distilling and filtering

>>7856099
>>>/vg/131761623

>>7856104
Middle school level reasoning, autistic infant level retardation.

>>7856104
That’s like saying there’s no water in orange juice, because oranges don’t have any water in them, just juice. Really stupid.

>is the water in our bodies actual H2O

uh....is there non-H2O water that i haven't heard of?

>>7856116
That's /vg/ alright

>>7856122
>he doesn't drink H2O2

casual

dihydrogen monoxide is deadly

every person who has consumed dihydrogen monoxide has died

>>7856122
I just assumed the possibility that people might be talking about other non-h2o liquids when talking about water in the human body, /vg/ fogged my mind and I was blinded by the dark side.

>>7856139
Well, just catalase my shit up then.

>>7856140
Actually 7.4 billion humans have consumed dihydrogen monoxide without dying.

Compared to the 100 billion humans that have died after consuming the chemical, that isn't a very good rate of survival. But it's certainly not 100%.

>>7856153
It takes a long while to kill you.

>>7856150
Kekd

>>7856153
>without dying
Their bodies are constantly deteriorating however. Its only a matter of time.

>>7856153

Dihydrogen monoxide is even found in nuclear reactors

>>7856175
In fact, it can be found in every person who died of cancer to. Coincidence? I think not.

>>7856121
I think it's amazing that in this day and age, someone with access to the internet has such a shallow world view. That person has never realized one bit of the implications of atomic theory. It's probably close to how alchemists viewed nature. A living relic.

File: sop.jpg (711KB, 1280x960px) Image search: [Google]

711KB, 1280x960px

>>7856141
>ask lab assistant for a glass of water
>take a fast gulp
>somethings wrong
>it's actually ethyl acetate
>choke in surprise, inhale some
>intense coughing fit
>stomach warm as fuck from hydrolysis
>inhale vapor as it leaves stomach
>cough some more, double over
>coworkers all stop what they're doing to stare, PI is leaning his head out his office
>finally manage "what the FUCK anon?"
>"Oh, I thought you wanted a non-h2o liquid."
>mfw

>>7856186
Steps for making gold:
Have rock. Have gold leaf. Cover rock in gold leaf till no rock surface can be seen. Chant rhythmic gibberish that sounds like angry chimps speaking Latin. Boil rock. Rock has now become solid gold. Profit heavily, write book.

>>7856186
>'old stuff is stupid'

You have triggered me. Learn about alchemy if you are going to insult it.

>>7856222
Lead to gold, a universal solvent, and an elixir of youth, were never the goals of alchemy. All three of these things were used as examples of what someone with a perfect understanding of everything would theoretically be able to do, and as such the pursuit of these things was the 'goal' only insofar as to use as proof of your understanding, not as the reason anything was done. The purpose of alchemy was to understand how the universe worked.

>>7856233
And make gold.

Im sure there is some hydroxide and hydronium mixed in the water of our body, but i doubt its any more than one part per million

>>7856270
do the terms physiological pH and acid-base equilibrium mean nothing now? I can't keep up with /sci/ence anymore