inflammable

The only logical way out of the flammable/inflammable mess is to use 'flammable' and 'non-inflammable', which makes me so mad.

Another word that follows a similar pattern: flammable and inflammable mean the same thing.

Further confusing the issue: inflammable means exactly the same thing as flammable.

Without government intervention (Socialism) you would get no fish, inflammable kids' pajamas and toxins in your food.

Yes, I know that metric prefixes have official definitions; but inflammable means flammable.

Another confusing one: inflammable, which means capable of being set on fire but follows the same pattern as other words in which the prefix in- connotes negation, e.g.

Personally, I’m more in favour of flammable (able to catch fire) and inflammable (not able to catch fire).

Similarly, inflammable is the historic term and flammable is the modern variant.

@swalkergibson flammable and inflammable both mean the same thing.

But here is this encyclopedia telling me it's INflammable.

Be careful about how you store those inflammable propellers.

I think you're right though, Turkey is much more unpredictable and inflammable.

Flammable was invented precisely because people assumed "inflammable" meant its opposite.

“Inflammable” is ambiguous, and it makes a great deal of difference which meaning is intended.

Generally I agree with this approach, but this case seems similar (though obviously not in the safety aspects) to "flammable" versus "inflammable".

In this case the "private business property" comprises huge, heavy, metal objects carrying large amounts of highly inflammable fuel that are flying through the sky at high speed over the heads and homes of millions of people.

Inflammable only ever means one thing regardless of how ridiculous english might be.

Inflammable made me so angry as a child/teen when I found out.