By notinflammable - 27/06/2009 04:41 - United States
![Spicy](/images/v2/picto/spicy.png)
By notinflammable - 27/06/2009 04:41 - United States
By FMLFMLFMLFML - 29/05/2009 17:52 - United States
By ilovesocks - 20/01/2010 06:17 - United States
By pmek - 26/03/2012 09:11 - Australia - Collingwood
By Anonymous - 16/07/2024 05:00 - United States - Bakersfield
By nnniii - 16/11/2015 04:55 - United States - Seattle
By SpiderMan - 12/03/2009 00:23 - United States
By blocked_by_fire - 17/04/2012 18:13 - United States - Pullman
By batsu - 27/01/2012 06:48 - Canada
By Colton - 20/12/2011 02:29 - United States
By BubbaYoshi117 - 07/01/2020 20:00 - United States - Kirkland
...so it was inflammable then, yes? as was the sock you should probably go die so the world doesn't have to suffer you any more
LOL at the last sentence
inflammable means flammable, jesus christ.
you're retarded
regardless if the seman was flammable or non-flammable, the sock obviously is, so that kind of ruins the experiment. you probably just set the sock on fire.
Stole my comment... There are so many things wrong with this FML though. Logic is clearly not the OP's strong suit. Possibly not english either...
Inflammable means able to catch on fire. But a sock can catch on fire. Fool.
"inflammable" means it can be lit on fire...
Keywords
why on earth did you think this was a good idea in the first place?
You know that "flammable" and "inflammable" mean the same thing right? Inflammable things catch fire???