Water is a toxic/addictive substance

In the last argument the con brought up valid points and pointed towards gaps in my argument which i plan on filling. Con rebuttal #1: First i would like to state that the Con used a very unreliable source( yahoo answers). Anyone that knows anything of this site would know that anyone with a yahoo account can post answers on it. Meaning that if someone asked what the answer to 1 1 is i could reply with 5.(i would like to add the that majority of this rebuttal was copied/pasted from the website just mentioned.I would also like to point out that the person in which the con got her information stated they got this information from the top of their heads(this can be found in the bottom of the of the sources answer in the source(s) section). Even with her inadequate sources i can still go to understand that the purpose of this rebuttal was to get the point across that the majority of water that we intake does not come from air vapor because only 2% of the atmosphere is air vapor. This although it, may or may not be true,(we wouldn't know because of the weak source) means that there is at least 2% of water vapor in the air we breath and although i don't have a degree involving math i believe that after constantly breathing 2% of water vapor from the air it will eventually add up to a much larger number/percentage. Con rebuttal 2:The con stated that my fact" The average person can only survive 3 days without water." was irrelevant to this discussion or rather unexplained. well now i will be taking the time to explain by using alcohol an example. A statement on ( https://www.psychologytoday.com... ) says that "after long term use, withdrawal from alcohol can kill.". Water is the same way and since we have all been consuming water even before we were born(through your umbilical cord) we would be considered long term users which means that we can die from the withdrawal of water on after three days on average.(i hope this explains it.) Con rebuttal 3: in this rebuttal the Con implied that i have been contradicting myself by saying that one moment im saying that we need water to survive(which was just explained) and the next moment am saying that it kills us(which i will explain now). To explain how water kills us i will be using an example like the one i used earlier(the one about alcohol). For the example i will be using the grand canyon and discussing how it go so grand. For those of you who don't know, the grand canyon wasn't always a canyon but over time it was eroded by water which formed the great land mass in arizona today. Now i want you to think about this question that i am getting ready to ask. If water can create a 277 mile long and 6,000 feet deep gaping hole in solid rock then what can it do to our internal body that is so fragile. The answer is that it can destroy your internal body causing you to die. As far as the Cons argument 1 is concerned i have very little to say, but nonetheless i will still say them.I will not be sayig anything about the cons statement"you need water to survive, but this doesn't make it addicting" because i have already expressed my feelings about this in the paragraphs above this. I want the Con to know that i know that people can live longer than 3 days without water that is why i said on average. Lastly i would likely to point out that i have realized that the con also copied/pasted most of this information straight from the website(LIke in her first rebuttal). Just To be clear by no means am i accusing the Con plagiarism because she listed all of her sources but her constant copying can only mean two things. 1)The con did not change up the information because she was feeling a bit lazy at the time she published this(which is understandable because everyone gets lazy sometimes). 2) )The con did not change up the information because she does not know anything about this topic so she just copied and pasted the first thing she saw(including an unreliable source from yahoo answers). if it is 1 then there is no problem but if it is 2 then i would like to go and say that the con has no right to say that water isn't addictive/toxic because she doesn't know. So i await the Con answer. are you 1 or 2?(i doubt that she would admit to being 2 although that is the likely answer) This will be the conclusion of my third round debate. Source(s) https://www.psychologytoday.com... http://www.bobspixels.com... http://www.nps.gov...